Reformed Theology - Penal Substitution and the Imputed Righteousness of Christ

[Skinski7]

Let's peel off the fluff and get to some of the bottom line issues.


Point 1.
Penal Substitution is a doctrine which was birthed out of the Protestant Reformation when certain Reformers added a Judicial Aspect to the Anselmian Satisfaction Model of the Atonement.

(a) References: The Idea of Atonement in Christian Theology, Rashdall Hastings, 1919. Full text available at The idea of atonement in Christian theology : Rashdall, Hastings, 1858-1924 : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive

(b) Wikipedia. While it is true that anyone can write an article on wikipedia the articles are reviewed by the community to ensure a semblance of accuracy. The articles one the Atonement clearly represent an accurate portrayel of the development of Atonement theories through history.

Atonement in Christianity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Satisfaction theory of atonement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Penal substitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(c) Theopedia. This is a website similar to Wikipedia but the content is more related to Theology in general.
http://www.theopedia.com/Atonement_of_Christ

Extract

The Penal-Substitution Theory: This view was formulated by the 16th century Reformers as an extension of Anselm's Satisfaction theory. Anselm's theory was correct in introducing the satisfaction aspect of Christ's work and its necessity, however the Reformers saw it as insufficient because it was referenced to God's honor rather than his justice and holiness and was couched more in terms of a commercial transaction than a penal substitution. This Reformed view says simply that Christ died for man, in man's place, taking his sins and bearing them for him. The bearing of man's sins takes the punishment for them and sets the believer free from the penal demands of the law: The righteousness of the law and the holiness of God are satisfied by this substitution.

(d) Penal Substitution in Church History, Michael J. Vlach, 2009.
http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj20i.pdf
This fourth reference is an interesting work because the author attempts to prove that the Patristic era of the church upheld the Penal Substition view of the atonement. What makes it interesting is that if one actually reads the quotes he provides from early church fathers one will find that none of those quotes clearly state anything close to the Penal Substition. That Jesus "died on behalf of sinners" or that He "bore our sins" does not mean that Jesus "bore the full wrath of God in the place of the sinner."



Point 2.
Penal Substitution clearly teaches that Jesus Christ bore the "wrath of God" as the "sinners substitute" (ie. a Penal Substitute) and due to this the wrath of God no longer abides on those He died for because the justice of God was "satisfied." One of the problems with this theory is that the Bible teaches that the wages of sin is death and that the punishment due to the sinner is being cast into hell which in turn is cast into the Lake of Fire. If Jesus bore the full wrath of God for sin then Jesus would have to be presently in hell, outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth, the end of which is to eventually be cast into the Lake of Fire.

Jesus suffered an excrutiating death on the cross at the hands of sinful men and then rose from the dead three days later. It is clearly evident that Jesus did not bear the literal penalty due the wicked.

This second point alone is clearly enough to thoroughly destroy any notion that the Penal Substitution view of the Atonement is factual.

Point 3.
If Jesus literally bore the penalty due the sinner and thus satisifed the wrath of God then it would clearly mean that the atonement is Limited in that Jesus died only for those who would be saved. If the Atonement is Universal in application then that would mean that the penalty of sin was satisifed on behalf of all sinners and thus could not be due again. Therefore under Penal Substitution the Atonement is either limited in scope or universal salvation is true.

Therfore it is a logical necessity that anyone who holds to the Penal Substitution view of the atonement must consistently hold to the view that Jesus did not die for all men lest universalism be true. Here is a quote from the Reformed Theologian John MacArthur who makes this very point...

And Christ died as your substitute and He bore your sins on the cross, therefore you died with Him there. This is a limiting aspect of the death of Christ. It necessarily limits the application of the atonement. The atonement, listen carefully, can only be a real substitution for those who died in Christ. I'll say that again. The atonement can only be a real substitution for those who died in Christ on the basis of those statements in that verse. The all is everyone who died in Christ, everyone for whom Christ was the substitute. That is the sense of the atonement which is limited.

...

But when you talk about substitution, you now are talking about the limited aspect of it. It is limited to those who died in Christ. Now you have to ask the question...who are those who died in Christ? To answer that, look at Romans chapter 3--Romans chapter 3. In Romans chapter 3 this is very important, verse 25, well verse 24 talks about the gift of God's grace which is the salvation or redemption in Christ. In verse 25 God displayed publicly as a propitiation, a satisfaction, a covering, appeasing the wrath of God, He displayed Christ as that. So He's talking about Christ's redeeming work, His justifying work, His work of salvation. And then in verse 26 we get right down to it. The middle of the verse, "All this that Jesus Christ and that God whose purpose it is might be just and the justifier of the one who...what?...has faith in Jesus." There's the qualifier.

...So He is the substitute only for those who believe. That's the point. Otherwise you've got a major problem because you've got Christ dying as a substitute for the whole world, that means He was bearing the sins of the whole world in a substitutionary sense. And if, in fact, He was carrying Himself to the cross as a substitute for the sins of every person who ever lived, He would therefore have done away with the wrath of God and procured for them eternal life, and we'd all be universalists. So there has to be a limiting feature.

A Ministry of Integrity, Part 3

While John Macarthur may teach that there are some "universal aspects" related to the death of Christ he is forced to logically conclude that Jesus only really died for the elect and not for the entire world. This is clearly an example of where a doctrine forces the Theologian to redefine scriptures to fit a preexisting belief. What John MacArthur needs to do is throw out the writings of Augustine, Luther and Calvin and yield to what the Scripture actually teaches. Yet I fear that he (and those like him) have too much invested in the lie to do such a thing.


Point 4.
Penal Substitution denies that God forgives sins. It teaches that sin is a literal transferable property and that God literall transferred sin to an innocent (Christ) and then punished Him in the place of the sinner. It was through this that God's wrath was satisfied and thus with the sins paid for the sinner could now be excused. Thus the sins are not actually forgiven they were simply transferred to another and still punished.

This in and of itself paints God as unjust due to punishing an innocent in order to excuse the guilty. Yet the Bible states...

Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Point 5.
Penal Substitution logically concludes that salvation is purely forensic and that unconditional eternal security is true.

Penal Substitution serves to redefine salvation as a mere book-keeping entry where the problem between God and man is rectified through a legal transaction as opposed to repentance and faith whereby the actual motivation for rebellion is dealt with once and for all. Due to the "penalty being paid" under Penal Substitution it cannot be "made due again" thus if it has been paid for on your behalf then there is no sin you can do which would forfeit your right standing before God which means you now have a license to sin. Many on these forums believe this very tenet and while they deny that they have a license to sin and will this say you "should" not sin, they simply cannot say you "cannot" sin, because in their minds salvation is merely forensic in nature and is totally disconnected from deeds.

Point 6.
Penal Substitution completely negates the release from the bondage of sin. Under Penal Substitution salvation is merely "being set free from condemnation" as opposed to "being set free from condemnation and bondage." Penal Substitution gives people a false assurance of salvation whilst they remain in bondage to their sins. That is why those beholden to this error take so much offense to the message of "go and sin no more" because in their minds "going and sinning no more" has NOTHING to do with salvation. To imply that "going and sinning no more" is related to "being saved" is basically a direct attack upon their assurance of salvation.

This is why those who cling to the doctrine of Penal Substitution are so opposed to the message of "the sin must stop." To imply that a cessation of sin must result from a genuine repentance is a direct attack on the premise of a salvation based on an abstract judicial exchange. This is why Penal Substitution theology is so dangerous for it innoculates the mind against the truth of Biblical repentance and Biblical faith having replaced them with "abstract and passive notions."

Point 7.
If the sins of all men were literally transferred to the account of Jesus (if He bore the guilt) then He would not have been without spot. The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus offered Himself without spot to God (Heb 9:14). Yet Penal Substitution teaches that Jesus offered Himself up "with our spots." If Penal Substitution is true then Jesus was spotted with sin when He offered Himself. This view is probably the reason why the translators of the King James Bible concluded with "He was made sin" in 2Cor 5:21 as opposed to "sin offering" which would be more in line with the Septuagint (see Adam Clarke's Commentary on 2Cor 5:21 2�Corinthians 5:1 - Adam Clarke Commentary - Commentaries - StudyLight.org )


Each of the above points clearly and logically refute any notion that Penal Substitution can be true. Taken together they completely destroy the doctrine at the foundation level and those who wish to uphold the doctrine must put their head in the sand and simply ignore the logical inconsistencies of their framework.




Now the other aspect often connected to Penal Substitition is that of the doctrine of the "Imputed Righteousness of Christ" whereby the literal obedience and righteousness of Christ is credited to the account of the believer. Thus, according to this view, when God looks at the believer He does not see their wretchedness but rather He sees Jesus.

I have previously written quite extensively on the problems of the Reformed View of Imputed Righteousness. Note I don't deny imputed righteousness (God imputes faith as righteousness), I deny the imputed righteousness OF CHRIST.

http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/40982-biblical-view-imputed-righteousness.html
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/58397-imputed-righteousness-christ.html#post922511


One challenge that has been issued to my words is right here...

http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...ransom-not-penal-substitution.html#post896383

Yet a point to note in that challenge is that this person has not truly addressed the fundamental objections I have with the Reformed Doctrine of the "Imputed Righteousness of Christ."

Namely that the doctrine originated with Martin Luther who called it the "Blessed Exchange." The early Church NEVER TAUGHT this doctrine and this is why those who teach it will not cite early writings teaching it. They don't exist as far as I can tell.

Rom 4 teaches that it is "faith" that God counts as righteousness and there is a "walk" associated with that faith and this faith is also said to "establish the law." If the righteousness that God credits a believer with is a judicial transaction of the literal righteousness of Christ (ie. teahcing that virtue is a transferable property) then the walk in Rom 4:12 would have NOTHING to do with it nor would "faith establish the law" (Rom 3:31).

Yet if God reckoning one righteous by a faith that works by love (Gal 5:6) apart from the works of the law (Gal 5:4-5) then "walking in the steps of faith" (Rom 4:12) makes perfect sense. "Faith establishing the law" also makes perfect sense.

Whenever the Reformers expound on the "Imputation of Christ's Righteousness" they will ALWAYS skip over Romans 4:11-13. That alone ought to give people pause. Their doctrine can only be established by isolating scriptures out of context whilst rejecting the whole counsel of God.

Now to the questions of Elin and Rom 3:25-26...

"God presented Jesus as a sacrifice of propitiation through faith in his blood.

He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had passed over

(left unpunished) the sins committed beforehand (OT)--he did it to demonstrate his justice

at the present time,so as to be just and the one who justifies." (Ro 3:25-26)

1) What "passed over" the sins committed beforehand (OT)?

2) The "what passed over" consisted precisely of?

3) How did the "what passed over" demonstrate God's justice?

4) For what did Jesus' sacrificial death atone?

5) How does Jesus' sacrificial death atone (make reparation, amends) for it?

6) What is the connection between his atonement and my faith in it (his blood)?

Until you present a consistent and Biblical explanation of the two sets of questions above,

"You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures." (Mt 22:29)

"Go and learn what they mean." (Mt 9:13)

Instead of Elin addressing the fundamentals of my objections she has presented a diversion and put it on me to "explain this" and that "if I don't" then she is "justified in ignoring my fundamental objections." All Elin has done is try to obfuscate the issue by subtly changing the subject.

Let's examine the passage in question...

Rom 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Rom 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Rom 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Rom 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

So what of that passage? Does it teach that the righteousness of Jesus Christ is credited to the believers account? No. It does not say anything of the sort. Notice how those who preach this doctrine cannot provide a SINGLE SCRIPTURE which states or even implies IN CONTEXT that the obedient track record of Jesus is credited to a believers account by faith. Not a single passage. All they can do is quote a passage and then use RHETORIC and try and imply that teaching WHILST CONTRADICTING what the Bible says elsewhere.

Rom 3:22 Notes...The righteousness of God is by the the faith of Jesus Christ. What was the faith of Jesus Christ? It was a faith that worked by love which established the law in the heart and thus the righteousness of the law was fulfilled as He walked after the Spirit. If we believe in Jesus (ie. we trust and obey) then we become partakers of the righteousness of God.

Rom 3:24 Notes... This is the free gift of God which Paul references in Rom 6:23

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

It is through "abiding in Christ" that we have access to eternal life. Hence redemption (redeemed by payment of ransom ie. the blood of Christ) is IN Christ (Rom 3:24).

Rom 3:25 Notes... Jesus was the propitiatory (mercy seat) offering whose blood purges the sacrifice of sin thus making it acceptable to God. We are the living sacrifice offered up to God which is made clean by the blood. The righteousness of Jesus (without spot) was declared (through His sin offering) for the remission of PAST SINS. Basically our past rebellion is wiped out and thus we can be restored to fellowship with God. There is no restoration to God within the framework of ongoing rebellion which is why the Bible teaches "repentance for remission." The rebellion ceases hence their is no remission of present or future sin (hence Heb 10:26). Acts 3:19 states...

Act 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;

Rom 3:26 notes... Jesus justifies those who believe (trust and yield) as opposed to those who do not believe (reject His counsel and thus refuse to yield). When we abide in Christ the light of God is manifest THROUGH us and the result is the production of good fruit.

John confirms this when he says, "hereby we know that we are in him" in the context of keeping the words of Jesus.

1Jn 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
1Jn 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
1Jn 2:5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
1Jn 2:6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

One of the greatest fallacies of the purely forensic "Imputed Righteousness of Christ" is that by disconnecting manifest conduct from righteousness it excuses the presence of ongoing sin in justification. Therefore one does not have to "walk as he walked" nor "walk in the steps of a faith that works by love." The "walk" is taught as something that is "subsequent" to salvation, the "walk" is something that occurs later (which one reason why the church congregations are full of sin).

 

[Skinski7]

Therefore when questions like this are asked to a typical pastor...

Does a pornography addict have to forsake and therefore stop viewing pornography BEFORE God grants forgiveness?

Does a child molester have to stop molesting children BEFORE God grants forgiveness?

The typical response is "No, the sin does not have to stop." The reason the sin does not have to stop in the minds of these pastors is because they perceive salvation as purely a judicial abstraction. Salvation to them is purely based off of the fact (to them) that the wrath of God was poured out on Jesus and that the righteousness of Jesus is credited to the believers account by faith. When a person simple "trusts" in the "exchange" they are "soundly saved."

If Jesus literally bore the punishment for sin, if Jesus literally absorbed the wrath of God due the sinner then that wrath HAS BEEN SATISFIED. Therefore there is no sin that can be committed that could "unsatisfy" this wrath. Therefore there is no sin that has to be forsaken to "unsatisfy" this wrath either. It's all a judicial done deal. Hence sins are forgiven in advance which forces these people to twist the "past sins" of Rom 3:25 and the "purged of old sins" of 2Pet 1:9 into meaning something other than what it PLAINLY states.

Thus when someone like me comes along and attacks the root of this theology (that salvation is rooted in a forensic legal transaction) to them I am attacking the "Finished Work of Christ" as they perceive it. Which is why I get so many responses like, "you believe Jesus died for nothing" or "you think you can save yourself" or "you think you can make God owe you salvation" etc. All fallacious responses due to these people viewing salvation as based on a FORENSIC SUBSTITUTION.

I am attacking the very root of their theology and not only that I use the Bible and reason to do it. Is it any wonder that some of these people want me banned? They cannot specifically address my objections with Scripture.




The bottom line of what they totally miss is this...

Tit 2:14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

Authentic salvation is having actually been REDEEMED FROM ALL INIQUITY and MADE PURE. There is nothing JUDICIAL about it. True salvation is a literal practicality and not a forensic abstraction.

What Satan has done is introduce false teachings which completely undermine the "Purity of Heart" which is taught in the Bible. Instead of people being redeemed and made pure, that are given a notion that they are saved whilst still in a state of moral corruption.

Satan does not want people to be truly redeemed from all iniquity and made pure because he knows that that must occur for one to be truly reconciled to God. Satan wants people to believe they can be reconciled whilst still yolked to corruption.

 

[Abiding]

standing and state, atonement and sanctification
Is there anyway skinski you can separate these things
and quit attacking foundational truths?

[h=3]Titus 3:5[/h]
[SUP]5 [/SUP]Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

 

[Tommy4Christ]

I believe Titus 3-5 is referring to outer works of the law, such as circumcision, keeping the Sabbath, such as what the Pharisees came at Jesus with, and what is being used in EPH 2-9..There are way too many scriptures that are against faith alone, osas, do nothing etc.. mercy does save us, as we forsake our sins, God grants us mercy in His own good pleasure, but the sin must stop, which is a work, so I think you are taking this verse out of context, even though it implies what you believe, so be sure to make sure all scripture harmonizes with the rest of scripture!

 

[Abiding]

I believe Titus 3-5 is referring to outer works of the law, such as circumcision, keeping the Sabbath, such as what the Pharisees came at Jesus with, and what is being used in EPH 2-9..There are way too many scriptures that are against faith alone, osas, do nothing etc.. mercy does save us, as we forsake our sins, God grants us mercy in His own good pleasure, but the sin must stop, which is a work, so I think you are taking this verse out of context, even though it implies what you believe, so be sure to make sure all scripture harmonizes with the rest of scripture!

Well Tommy you dont know me so you dont know what i believe. Right? Im sure not into disobdience and lawnessness.

Anyway ill put it in its context
3 Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to obey, to be ready for every good work, [SUP]2 [/SUP]to speak evil of no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing all humility to all men. [SUP]3 [/SUP]For we ourselves were also once foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful and hating one another. [SUP]4 [/SUP]But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared, [SUP]5 [/SUP]not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, [SUP]6 [/SUP]whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, [SUP]7 [/SUP]that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
[SUP]8 [/SUP]This is a faithful saying, and these things I want you to affirm constantly, that those who have believed in God should be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable to men.

 

[Elin]

Ro 5:18-19:

v. 18 - Just as the result of one trespass (sin in the garden) was condemnation for all men (Adam's guilt imputed to all men),
so also the result of one act of righteousness (Jesus' death) was justification that brings life for all men (forgiveness of sin imputed to all who believe in Jesus).

v. 19 - Just as through the disobedience of the one man (Adam), the many were made sinners (Adam's guilt imputed to all men),
so also through the obedience of the one man (Jesus), the many will be made righteous (Jesus' righteousness imputed to all who believe in him).

impute = to charge with (guilt of Adam), or credit with (righteousness of Christ)

"An individual is accountable for their own sin because without the law sin is not imputed."

That doesn't even make sense.
You don't have a clue regarding the meaning of Ro 5:12-21 and imputation, which has already been covered with you (here).

The Bible teaches that we are all born in bondage to sin, sold to sin by Adam (Ro 5:12-14).
The argument of the text is as follows:

Death is the wages of sin (Ro 6:23), and all sin is transgression of the law (1Jn 3:4).
However, there was no law to transgress between Adam and Moses, and yet all mankind died (v.14).
Because death is the wages of sin, their death means they were guilty of sin (v.12).

But sin is not taken into account when there is no law (v.13).
So what sin were those between Adam and Moses guilty of that caused their death?

Their death was caused by the transgression of one man, of which transgression
all mankind was held guilty (Ro 5:15), which is why all men died between Adam and Moses
even though sin was not taken into account, and is the only cause of death.

All mankind is born in bondage to sin by their descent from Adam, who sold them to sin (Ro 7:14).
Men did not sell themselves into bondage to sin. Mankind inherited their bondage to sin from Adam,
caused by his transgression of the law, "Thou shalt not eat of it."

Therefore, all mankind is by their sinful nature born an object of God's wrath (Eph 2:3).

Let's just cut to the chase:

Because you are clueless about the meaning of Ro 3:25-26 (and, therefore, cannot present a consistent and Biblical explanation of my questions regarding it, here) you are, therefore, clueless about the meaning of Ro 5:12-21, and imputation.

So any further discussion witih you on atonement, or God's gift of righteousness (Ro 3:21, 22, 4:11, 5:17) is unproductive until you present that consistent and Biblical explanation of my questions, here.

You have clearly demonstrated the problem in three threads now, and this will be the fourth.

You are in no position to Biblically evaluate the authors you read because you don't understand the Scriptures.
You don't even know where to start to present your position Biblically, therefore, many of your statements on the Scriptures are just ridiculous, being based as they are in Biblical ignorance.

All you can do is present the views of other men, declaring those with whom you disagree to be wrong, and based in no sound understanding and exegesis of your own..

For example, you do not, because you cannot, exegete Ro 3:25-26 (presented here).

There can be no productive discussion with you about the Scriptures because you don't understand them and, therefore, have to base your opinions of what is right and wrong on the opinions of men.

You really should not be trying to discuss the Bible when you cannot support your view with sound exegesis of the Scripture, in light of all the Scriptures.

You are simply defending the views of men, and not the Scriptures.

You should be in an unorthodox theology discussion forum, not in a Bible discussion forum.

 

[Tommy4Christ]

James2:22-24, Gal5:6, 2Cor6:1, all show necessity of Deeds. but not dead works of religion, but they never see that. to them doing anything is works, even cleaning up your act, that's why the church is in such a mess!

 

[mark54]

It's quite simple really. Paul's Gospel hangs on a person knowing they are not under law unto righteousness before God
Sin is the transgression of the law

So if a person has to cease sin BEFORE God will accept them, they have to uphold the law, in their own strength before God will accept them as his child

Wel if that is the case Paul was a false Apostle. And we know he was not

 

[Tommy4Christ]

Hope this helps, here is a great explanation of Titus in context. Courtesy standingthegap.org
Titus 3-3-7
3 For we ourselves were also once foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful and hating one another. 4 But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared, 5 not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, 6 whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
On the blogs they claimed to be washed, but they are still dirty, Sanctified in Christ, but still in sin.
Take a look at the Greek definition of Regeneration:
New birth, reproduction, renewal, recreation, regeneration
a) Hence renovation, regeneration, the production of a new life consecrated to God, a radical change of mind for the better. The word often used to denote the restoration of a thing to its pristine state, its renovation, as a renewal or restoration of life after death
b) The renovation of the earth after the deluge
c) The renewal of the world to take place after its destruction by fire, as the Stoics taught
d) the signal and glorious change of all things (in heaven and earth) for the better, that restoration of the primal and perfect condition of things which existed before the fall of our first parents, which the Jews looked for in connection with the advent of the Messiah, and which Christians expected in connection with the visible return of Jesus from heaven.

 

[Tommy4Christ]

Regeneration in Christ, Titus 3:3-7
For we ourselves were also once foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful and hating one another. But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
The Saved in sin, sin everyday crowd knows nothing of this renewing. They have accepted a Provision that provides nothing dynamic or life changing, but only a magic Cover for their sins, but inside they remain vile to the core as before they ‘received’ Jesus. In the passage above being Justified by His Grace has also brought about a ‘washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit’, the body of sin is no longer an issue! The bondage is broken. Grace sets us Free in this Present age! Titus2:11-14

Regeneration (New Birth) is Translated as the following:

new birth, reproduction, renewal, recreation, regeneration
hence renovation, regeneration, the production of a new life consecrated to God, a radical change of mind for the better. The word often used to denote the restoration of a thing to its pristine state, its renovation, as a renewal or restoration of life after death
the renovation of the earth after the deluge
the renewal of the world to take place after its destruction by fire, as the Stoics taught
the signal and glorious change of all things (in heaven and earth) for the better, that restoration of the primal and perfect condition of things which existed before the fall of our first parents, which the Jews looked for in connection with the advent of the Messiah, and which Christians expected in connection with the visible return of Jesus from heaven.

Renewing Means: a renewal, renovation, complete change for the better, as in Rom12:1-2 ‘Transformed by the renewing of your Mind!’

If then a person has been Regenerated and Renewed by the Spirit through Repentance and faith Proven by deeds. (2Cor7:10-11) The WORD itself (Logos, Christ incarnate) has WASHED them from the inside out!

‘that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word’ Eph5:26
You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. Jh15:3
WHY were they CLEAN? Because you PURIFY your Heart BY Obedience to the Truth! 1Pet1:22
This wonderful Regeneration and Renewal takes place AFTER a person has Crucified the flesh with its Passions and Desires (Gal5:24) in the Baptism of Repentance, Rom6:4-7

Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. For he who has died has been freed from sin.
The END Result of Repentance then is:
Body of Sin Done away with
Old man Crucified
No Longer Slave to sin, But FREED from Sin!
Purity of Heart! 2Cor7:11
It was OBEDIENCE from the Heart that Delivered you to this Marvelous Regeneration & Renewal:
Rom6:16 ‘But God be thanked that though you were Slaves to sin, yet you OBEYED from the heart that form of Doctrine to which you were DELIEVERED!’

NOW ask yourself an honest question: “HOW can you still be the Chief of sinners, Romans Wretch with a Desperately Wicked heart who sins daily in thought, word and deed and have actually experienced this kind of RENEWAL?”

Something is DESPERATELY Wrong with your Supposed Salvation experience if NONE of this is present in your life now. Read the Passages again, Does any of it sound like this is some kind of Gradual process of sin, repent, sin repent for the rest of your life?

In the Rom12:1-2 Passage it says ‘Be TRANSFORMED’ by the Renewing of your Mind. This word is Metamorphoses, Its what happened to Christ in the Transfiguration! (Matt17:2, Mk2) So it would stand to Reason that the Regeneration of the Holy Spirit is also an instantaneous Metamorphosis of the Mind and spirit of man! That means the Bondage to Sin is broken the Mind is Cleansed and Purged of Lust and your entire Disposition is Changed. Isn’t that the Promise made by God through His Promises:
as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue, by which have been given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. 1Pet1:3-4
Partakers of the DIVINE Nature to ESCAPE the Corrupting influence of Lust! How can a person remain in bondage to lust and evil dispositions of the flesh and ‘have escaped’ it at the same time? Does that make sense to you? Is the Word of God merely saying these things to Mock us as we wallow in our sin and claim Salvation in Christ? I Don’t think so….

Those who Desire the Living Waters of Christ will come and Seek out this Regeneration and FIND it! But those who dream on that a person can be ‘of Christ’ and still be addicted to Sin will end up with nothing.

And the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let him who hears say, “Come!” And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely. Rev22:17
THIS is the Living Water that will Wash, Purify and Regenerate your Soul from all that is vile and corrupt. COME! Courtesy standingthegap.org,

 

[Elin]

"God presented Jesus as a sacrifice of propitiation through faith in his blood.

He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had passed over

(left unpunished) the sins committed beforehand (OT)--he did it to demonstrate his justice

at the present time,so as to be just and the one who justifies." (Ro 3:25-26)

1) What "passed over" the sins committed beforehand (OT)?

2) The "what passed over" consisted precisely of?

3) How did the "what passed over" demonstrate God's justice?

4) For what did Jesus' sacrificial death atone?

5) How does Jesus' sacrificial death atone (make reparation, amends) for it?

6) What is the connection between his atonement and my faith in it (his blood)?

Until you present a consistent and Biblical explanation of the questions above,

"You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures." (Mt 22:29)

"Go and learn what they mean." (Mt 9:13)

Now to the questions of Elin and Rom 3:25-26.

Instead of Elin addressing the fundamentals of my objections she has presented a diversion

"Diversion" depends on your point of view.

Until you reckon with the passage in question, everything you present is simply a diversion to avoid dealing with the text.

Let's examine the passage in question...

Rom 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Rom 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

Rom 3:25 Notes... Jesus was the propitiatory (mercy seat) offering whose blood purges the sacrifice of sin thus making it acceptable to God[/b].

That makes less sense than the senseless bolded blue statement of yours quoted in my previous post above.

Now let me get this straight.

The sacrifice of Jesus, which remits my sin, was cleansed by the blood of Jesus.

Jesus was cleansed by Jesus.

That's called an absurdity.

Rom 3:26 notes... Jesus justifies those who believe (trust and yield) as opposed to those who do not believe (reject His counsel and thus refuse to yield). When we abide in Christ the light of God is manifest THROUGH us and the result is the production of good fruit.

You didn't address what declared God's righteousness?

You didn't address how God was both just and the justifier?

"Go and learn what Ro 3:25-26 means." (Mt 9:13)

So I repeat: You do not, because you cannot, exegete Ro 3:25-26 (presented here).

There can be no productive discussion with you about the Scriptures because you don't understand them and, therefore, have to base your opinions of what is right and wrong on the opinions of men.

You really should not be trying to discuss the Bible when you cannot support your view with sound exegesis of the Scripture, in light of all the Scriptures.

You are simply defending the views of men, and not the Scriptures.

You should be in an unorthodox theology discussion forum, not in a Bible discussion forum.

 

[Ariel82]

Rom 4 teaches that it is "faith" that God counts as righteousness and there is a "walk" associated with that faith and this faith is also said to "establish the law." If the righteousness that God credits a believer with is a judicial transaction of the literal righteousness of Christ (ie. teahcing that virtue is a transferable property) then the walk in Rom 4:12 would have NOTHING to do with it nor would "faith establish the law" (Rom 3:31).

Yet if God reckoning one righteous by a faith that works by love (Gal 5:6) apart from the works of the law (Gal 5:4-5) then "walking in the steps of faith" (Rom 4:12) makes perfect sense. "Faith establishing the law" also makes perfect sense.

Whenever the Reformers expound on the "Imputation of Christ's Righteousness" they will ALWAYS skip over Romans 4:11-13. That alone ought to give people pause. Their doctrine can only be established by isolating scriptures out of context whilst rejecting the whole counsel of God.

what a load of baloney. don't you ever get tired of lying about what other people teach?

can't you for once just teach the Gospel instead of slandering others?

I agree that Romans 4 teaches of the Faith that God counts as righteousness. I disagree that Reformers do not teach Romans 4 verses 11-13.

I can quote quite a few people on the subject, but your favorite man to slander is Luther so I will ask do you know he teaches of TWO types of righteousness? One is Christ and the other is the believers. He says BOTH are necessary for someone to consumate the marriage. If you bothered to actually read the articles posted for you, you might learn something, but you are too full of your own self knowledge that you would rather condemn others and spread more lies.

I don't think you understand the gospel at all, though you make a good pretense of it. You even have a few truths mixed in so that people will not notice the glaring absence of True Faith in your message.

What do you have faith in Skinski?

you only believe your PAST sins are forgiven and anything else you call mistakes or self justify as something not quite equal to the sin before you thought yourself saved.

if people want to believe your lies about what others believe its their choice.

 

[zone]

James2:22-24, Gal5:6, 2Cor6:1, all show necessity of Deeds. but not dead works of religion, but they never see that. to them doing anything is works, even cleaning up your act, that's why the church is in such a mess!

so sick of this 'tude.
gimme your name and people i can contact to find out about you in real life.

or just post all about Tommy here....for us all to see.

i'll do the same.
till you agree to that you're all talk.

i don't believe you're walking the walk.
not for a moment.

 

[zone]

what a load of baloney. don't you ever get tired of lying about what other people teach?

can't you for once just teach the Gospel instead of slandering others?

I agree that Romans 4 teaches of the Faith that God counts as righteousness. I disagree that Reformers do not teach Romans 4 verses 11-13.

I can quote quite a few people on the subject, but your favorite man to slander is Luther so I will ask do you know he teaches of TWO types of righteousness? One is Christ and the other is the believers. He says BOTH are necessary for someone to consumate the marriage. If you bothered to actually read the articles posted for you, you might learn something, but you are too full of your own self knowledge that you would rather condemn others and spread more lies.

I don't think you understand the gospel at all, though you make a good pretense of it. You even have a few truths mixed in so that people will not notice the glaring absence of True Faith in your message.

What do you have faith in Skinski?

you only believe your PAST sins are forgiven and anything else you call mistakes or self justify as something not quite equal to the sin before you thought yourself saved.

if people want to believe your lies about what others believe its their choice.

agree.

this is from me personally based on what i've seen of skinski's online activity and his "theol...*cough*...ogy":

he ain't been born from above.

don't delay skinski.
repent.

 

[Ariel82]

Therefore when questions like this are asked to a typical pastor...

Does a pornography addict have to forsake and therefore stop viewing pornography BEFORE God grants forgiveness?

Does a child molester have to stop molesting children BEFORE God grants forgiveness?

The typical response is "No, the sin does not have to stop." The reason the sin does not have to stop in the minds of these pastors is because they perceive salvation as purely a judicial abstraction. Salvation to them is purely based off of the fact (to them) that the wrath of God was poured out on Jesus and that the righteousness of Jesus is credited to the believers account by faith. When a person simple "trusts" in the "exchange" they are "soundly saved."

well that's a lie. salvation doesn't happen until you have the HOLY SPIRIT. you are still setting up strawmen to torch..

If Jesus literally bore the punishment for sin, if Jesus literally absorbed the wrath of God due the sinner then that wrath HAS BEEN SATISFIED. Therefore there is no sin that can be committed that could "unsatisfy" this wrath. Therefore there is no sin that has to be forsaken to "unsatisfy" this wrath either. It's all a judicial done deal. Hence sins are forgiven in advance which forces these people to twist the "past sins" of Rom 3:25 and the "purged of old sins" of 2Pet 1:9 into meaning something other than what it PLAINLY states.

God has forgiven all sins but what you miss is the preaching about how people have to have the HOLY SPIRIT. i noticed its missing from alot of your rants.

Thus when someone like me comes along and attacks the root of this theology (that salvation is rooted in a forensic legal transaction) (because its not what people teach and you are lying and pretending to be a victim when you are agressively slandering many people and many teachings with your false strawmen) to them I am attacking the "Finished Work of Christ" as they perceive it. Which is why I get so many responses like, "you believe Jesus died for nothing" or "you think you can save yourself" or "you think you can make God owe you salvation" etc. All fallacious responses due to these people viewing salvation as based on a FORENSIC SUBSTITUTION.

I am attacking the very root of their theology and not only that I use the Bible and reason to do it. Is it any wonder that some of these people want me banned? They cannot specifically address my objections with Scripture.

actually you've been addressed quite a few times. you are just blind and unable to see what scripture clearly says about the Gospel message.

The bottom line of what they totally miss is this...

Tit 2:14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

Authentic salvation is having actually been REDEEMED FROM ALL INIQUITY and MADE PURE. There is nothing JUDICIAL about it. True salvation is a literal practicality and not a forensic abstraction.

actually i do agree that salvation is about heart purity, however there is some judicial aspects as well. you're problem is you don't understand the whole picture.

What Satan has done is introduce false teachings which completely undermine the "Purity of Heart" which is taught in the Bible. Instead of people being redeemed and made pure, that are given a notion that they are saved whilst still in a state of moral corruption.

Satan does not want people to be truly redeemed from all iniquity and made pure because he knows that that must occur for one to be truly reconciled to God. Satan wants people to believe they can be reconciled whilst still yolked to corruption.

you seem to know a lot about Satan's plans.

wonder if you know as much about God's.

 

[Ariel82]

Well Tommy you dont know me so you dont know what i believe. Right? Im sure not into disobdience and lawnessness.

Anyway ill put it in its context
3 Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to obey, to be ready for every good work, [SUP]2 [/SUP]to speak evil of no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing all humility to all men. [SUP]3 [/SUP]For we ourselves were also once foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful and hating one another. [SUP]4 [/SUP]But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared, [SUP]5 [/SUP]not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, [SUP]6 [/SUP]whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, [SUP]7 [/SUP]that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
[SUP]8 [/SUP]This is a faithful saying, and these things I want you to affirm constantly, that those who have believed in God should be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable to men.

perhaps we should take in the WHOLE counsel of God and move on to the next verses:

[SUP]9 [/SUP]But avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless. [SUP]10[/SUP]Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition, [SUP]11 [/SUP]knowing that such a person is warped and sinning, being self-condemned.

 

[Ariel82]

anyone else notice that the explanation totally skipped over the words "not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us,"

I agree that the Holy Spirit does the cleansing. however I do so hate half truths.

totally ignoring scripture to place false teachings in instead:

"Repentance and faith Proven by deeds." .... No true Faith is not proven by deeds but proven by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit that leads people into righteousness and away from sinful behavior. it is that GOD gave us His Holy Spirit that we are made righteous not because of our deeds.

yes when you have a true and living faith you will have good deeds but the BIBLE clearly says we are NOT saved by those deeds or those works of righteousness. that is not teaching that we should NOT do them, we definitely should. HOwever WHY we do them is MORE important than the outward actions because it shows an inward purity of heart.

we do NOT do them to earn God's approval but because out of love we know we have God's approval already.

because JESUS died for us. He was propiation of our sins. He cleansed us with His blood. He sent us the HOly Spirit so that with our spirit we might call out ABBA Father.

that is the gospel message.

You are a sinner, you need to repent. yOu need to fall on your knees and pray and study and truly understand what GOD has done for you through the death and resurrection of Christ. Understand what the NEW covenant is and how it puts to death the Law of sin and death. how the Old covenant has faded away. How the Law is a tutor until you are brought to Christ and filled with His Holy Spirit and How His Holy Spirit will lead you into the fulfilment of God's laws. How by walking with the Spirit you will gain the fruits of love, joy, peace, gentleness, loyalty, faithfulness, and self control. how diligently you will add to your faith wisdom, brotherly kindness and true love as God loves the world.

I pray for those new to the faith that they truly learn the GOSPEL message and not the lies so many pretend is God's Truth.

Read your Bible, pray, allow God's Holy Spirit to testify to the truth.

 

[Skinski7]

what a load of baloney. don't you ever get tired of lying about what other people teach?

can't you for once just teach the Gospel instead of slandering others?

I agree that Romans 4 teaches of the Faith that God counts as righteousness. I disagree that Reformers do not teach Romans 4 verses 11-13.

I can quote quite a few people on the subject, but your favorite man to slander is Luther so I will ask do you know he teaches of TWO types of righteousness? One is Christ and the other is the believers. He says BOTH are necessary for someone to consumate the marriage. If you bothered to actually read the articles posted for you, you might learn something, but you are too full of your own self knowledge that you would rather condemn others and spread more lies.

I don't think you understand the gospel at all, though you make a good pretense of it. You even have a few truths mixed in so that people will not notice the glaring absence of True Faith in your message.

What do you have faith in Skinski?

you only believe your PAST sins are forgiven and anything else you call mistakes or self justify as something not quite equal to the sin before you thought yourself saved.

if people want to believe your lies about what others believe its their choice.

What do I have faith in? My faith is in God and His only begotten Son Jesus Christ whom is the light of the world and is the only name by which anyone can be saved.

The Bible clearly teaches that it is past sins that are forgiven. It says so in Rom 3:25, 2Pet 1:9 and Hebrews 10:26 warns that there is no sacrifice remaining for ongoing willful sin. So what is the truth, your rhetoric or is it the words of Scripture?

The Bible also makes a clear distinction between presumptuous sin and non-presumptuous sin. Read Numbers 15 and you'll clearly see this distinction. John also speaks of sins unto death and sins not unto death right before he says that those born of God don't sin because they keep themselves. Which is true, your rhetoric or is it the words of Scripture?

If sin is forgiven in advance then why does the Bible teach "repentance for remission"? The truth is there is no forgiveness for sins that people refuse to forsake. There is no rebellion in salvation, NONE!

Is it slander when pastors teach that one can be in a justified state before God on the road to heaven and yet still engaged in the sins of the flesh and for me to point out that such a view is a dangerous error? These men are not preaching truth, they are preaching a dangerous deception.

It is common church teaching today that one can be addicted to pornography and be saved at the very same time. Look at my post where I asked "does a pornography addict have to forsake viewing porn BEFORE God will grant forgiveness." Many people said NO and were HIGHLY CRITICAL of the view that says "YES THEY HAVE TO STOP."



My message is that of repentance proven by deeds. One must be utterly broken through a godly sorrow they works a genuine change of mind (repentance) unto salvation. This genuine change of mind NECESSITATES a complete change in behaviour where the rebellion to God actually ceases.

In other words I agree with Isa 55:7, Pro 28:13, Jam 1:21 and the Prodigal Son having to leave the pig pen BEFORE forgiveness and restoration can occur.

The Bible teaches that so very clearly so many who profess Jesus Christ believe the opposite.

I also deny the Reformed doctrine of the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness as well as the wrath of God being poured out on Jesus. Even though both doctrines are of recent invention to challenge them is viewed as absolute heresy by many people.

What does it matter if Luther teaches two kinds of righteousness? The man is double tongued like many pastors today. In one moment they will teach that a homosexual has to forsake homosexual behaviour in order to enter the kingdom and in the next they will teach that a porn addict can be justified whilst he still struggles with that sin.

There is really only one kind of righteousness taught in the Bible and that is DOING WHAT IS RIGHT. It is pure fantasy to believe that the righteous record of another can literally be transferred to another and thus become the transferees own righteousness. That is pure nonsense.

Martin Luther did not teach the necessity of heart purity nor did he teach that the flesh with the passions and desires are crucified once and for all in repentance.

The Bible clearly states that those who are Christ's HAVE crucified the flesh with the passions and desires. When did this HAVE happen? It happens in repentance where one lays down their selfish "walking after the lusts of the flesh" life and takes up "the cross by denying themselves and following Jesus." Martin Luther taught no such thing, to him the cross was merely something done "for you" by which one was "saved" APART from any active participation.

Martin Luther was a false teacher whose theology was rooted in the writings of Augustine of Hippo.

Call it slander all you like but it is the truth.

Martin Luther added "alone" to "faith" Romans 3:28 and referred to the book of James which says "not by faith alone" as a book of straw as it pertains to salvation. Martin Luther clearly dismissed scripture which contradicted his doctrine. That right there is enough to discredit him without having to go through his writings and point out all the inconsistencies.

Unfortunately Martin Luther is a sacred cow to many people and to speak ill of his doctrine will produce vehement opposition. Many Catholics are offended if one speaks ill of the Pope, many Mormon's are offended if one is to speak ill of Joseph Smith, likewise many modern evangelical Protestants are offended if one is to speak ill of Martin Luther.

 

[SarahM777]

The Bible clearly teaches that it is past sins that are forgiven. It says so in Rom 3:25, 2Pet 1:9 and Hebrews 10:26 warns that there is no sacrifice remaining for ongoing willful sin. So what is the truth, your rhetoric or is it the words of Scripture?

Once again you have taken scripture out of context

Romans 3

[SUP]21 [/SUP]But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify.[SUP]22 [/SUP]This righteousness is given through faith in[SUP][h][/SUP] Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, [SUP]23 [/SUP]for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,[SUP]24 [/SUP]and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. [SUP]25 [/SUP]God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement,[SUP][i][/SUP] through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— [SUP]26 [/SUP]he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.


Forbearance

Definition

1 : a refraining from the enforcement of something (as a debt, right, or obligation) that is due

2
: the act of forbearing

3
: the quality of being forbearing : leniency


God had left the sins committed beforehand (Before that time) unpunished to show His righteousness in the present time when Christ was crucified.

 

[mark54]

If only past sins are forgiven the Christian must be under law, for sin is the transgression of the law