Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Theology from a biblical approach. Topics posted should have a direct relationship to scripture.

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby davo » Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:24 pm

Paidion wrote:However, I disbelieve that the consequences of God's wrath is the destruction of people—

So according to your position… what is *the wrath of God* and what does that look like :?:
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby LLC » Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:54 am

davo wrote:Because it became the epicentre of Israel’s life according to Law observance under the old covenant… something that could never bring life but only death, BECAUSE it was weakened by “the flesh” of those under it, as per…


If I understand you correctly, what you are suggesting is that God gave Israel a covenant of law observance, one that does not bring life but death.

According to Hebrews chapter 11, the covenant that God made was one of faith.
"By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts; and through it he being dead still speaks.'
"By faith Enoch was translated so that he did not see death..."
"By faith Noah , being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with Godly fear..."
"By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to the place which he would afterward receive as an inheritance..."
And so on and so forth.

So what happened to this covenant of faith? As I mentioned before, it tells us in Galatians 4:21-31. The covenant of law observance was born of the flesh(man-made) Verse 29 But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now."

According to Acts 7:37-43, They received the living oracles after being brought out of Egypt. However, some rejected God, "And in their hearts they turned back to Egypt, saying to Aaron, 'Make us gods to go before us; as for Moses who brought us out of the land of Egypt, we do not know what happened to him. And they made a calf in those days offered sacrifices to the idol and rejoiced in the work of their own hands."
As it goes on to say, they took up the tabernacle of Moloch and offered up slaughtered animals as sacrifices, and God let them go their own way.

Psalm 106 :19 "They made a calf in Horeb and worshipped a molten image. Thus they exchanged their glory for the image of an ox that that eats grass.'

And so there were two covenants; one established by faith in the Spirit of God(of the Spirit) and another of man-made laws and pagan practices ( of the flesh)
LLC
 
Posts: 696
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 9:45 am

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby davo » Wed Sep 13, 2017 5:13 am

LLC wrote:
davo wrote:Because it became the epicentre of Israel’s life according to Law observance under the old covenant… something that could never bring life but only death, BECAUSE it was weakened by “the flesh” of those under it, as per…


If I understand you correctly, what you are suggesting is that God gave Israel a covenant of law observance, one that does not bring life but death.

No, you would have that totally wrong… the law was holy, just and good (Rom 7:12; 1Tim 1:8), but it was weakened however by the flesh (Rom 8:3), and had righteousness come through the law then Christ died in vain (Gal 2:21; Heb 7:11). The law served as far as it could until Christ (Gal 3:24-25).

LLC wrote:According to Hebrews chapter 11, the covenant that God made was one of faith.

That was but one aspect… but WHY, apart from positional dogmatism, would you keep ignoring Paul’s clear and stated “covenants”?

LLC wrote:So what happened to this covenant of faith? As I mentioned before, it tells us in Galatians 4:21-31.

WHY NOT ACTUALLY read the passage as it puts the sword right through your untenable single covenant claim
Gal 4:24 …which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar—

There you have the primary TWO… old AND new. :roll:
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby Paidion » Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:35 am

Hi Davo, you wrote:So according to your position… what is *the wrath of God* and what does that look like [/quot

God's wrath is His anger concerning the wrongdoing (or "sin") of people, because He knows that all wrongdoing harms others. God expresses His anger by working on the wrongdoers and patiently waiting until they ALL repent (have a change of heart and mind).

(2 Peter 3:9 ESV) The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 76 years. I am now in my 80th year of life.
User avatar
Paidion
 
Posts: 3850
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: The Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby LLC » Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:44 pm

davo wrote:Gal 4:24 …which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar—


Davo, from what I understand God did not make a covenant with Hagar or Ishmael.

Gen. 17:19 "Then God said 'No, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son and you shall call his name Isaac; I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his descendants after him."

Gen. 17:21 "But My covenant I will establish with Isaac."

Figuratively speaking, Ishmael was an illegitimate child not born via faith in God. Therefore the covenant which is Hagar was not the everlasting covenant established by God through Isaac. It was a covenant that did not come from Mount Horeb( the mountain of God) but from Mount Sinai in Arabia, a foreign(pagan) location. I take this to mean that it was a covenant "made by human hands."

Isaac, however, was a child conceived by the Spirit of God/born of God. The promise is that all who have faith in and follow the Spirit of God shall be blessed (be fruitful) and have dominion over all things.

As Galatians 4:25 points out, those who were sons of Abraham through physical relationship only, and not sons of the same faith/ beliefs, were ruling Israel. As verse 29 says, "but as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit."
The sons of the Spirit were basically outnumbered(vs. 28). In this sense they were "weakened by the law".
Last edited by LLC on Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
LLC
 
Posts: 696
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 9:45 am

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby davo » Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:56 pm

The bible seems abundantly clear with regards to the plurality of covenants instigated by God, i.e., what Paul covered by his Rom 9:4 statement that you subsequently claim is “false”… here is more affirmative evidence:
Deut 4:31 (for the Lord your God is a merciful God), He will not forsake you nor destroy you, nor forget the covenant of your fathers which He swore to them.
Deut 5:3 The Lord did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, those who are here today, all of us who are alive.
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby LLC » Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:19 pm

davo wrote:Deut 4:31 (for the Lord your God is a merciful God), He will not forsake you nor destroy you, nor forget the covenant of your fathers which He swore to them.


As you quote "the covenant(one), not covenants, of your fathers (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob) was RENEWED/ resurrected/ brought back to life in Christ Jesus.

davo wrote:Deut 5:3 The Lord did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, those who are here today, all of us who are alive


The fathers being referred to in this verse may be the Egyptians, as many of these people were raised in Egyptian ways and were probably of mixed blood.
LLC
 
Posts: 696
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 9:45 am

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby davo » Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:43 am

:shock: :roll:

LLC wrote:
davo wrote:Deut 4:31 (for the Lord your God is a merciful God), He will not forsake you nor destroy you, nor forget the covenant of your fathers which He swore to them.


As you quote "the covenant(one), not covenants, of your fathers (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob) was RENEWED/ resurrected/ brought back to life in Christ Jesus.

You are kidding!? The covenant made with the fathers, i.e., Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was the promise of land and descendants.

LLC wrote:
davo wrote:Deut 5:3 The Lord did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, those who are here today, all of us who are alive


The fathers being referred to in this verse may be the Egyptians, as many of these people were raised in Egyptian ways and were probably of mixed blood.

The fathers here were NOT the Egyptians BUT likewise Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and as such they DID NOT have this covenant aka… the 10 Commandments, being given here TO MOSES. These texts speak of DIFFERENT covenants… again the likes that Paul references in Rom 9:4, period!
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby LLC » Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:25 am

davo wrote:You are kidding!? The covenant made with the fathers, i.e., Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was the promise of land and descendants.


Likewise, the covenant that was given to those brought out of the land of Egypt was the promise of land and descendants as it says in Deut. 7:12-13
"Then it shall come to pass, because you listen to these judgments and keep and do them, that the Lord your God will keep with you the covenant and the mercy which He swore to your fathers(Abraham, Isaac and Jacob). And He will love you and bless you and multiply you(descendants); He will also bless the fruit of your womb and the fruit of your land, your grain and your new wine and your oil, the increase of your cattle and the offspring of your flock in the land which He swore to your fathers to give you."

The descendants being spoken of are spiritual descendants; Abraham, Isaac and Jacob being the spiritual fathers.

davo wrote:The fathers here were NOT the Egyptians BUT likewise Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and as such they DID NOT have this covenant aka… the 10 Commandments, being given here TO MOSES. These texts speak of DIFFERENT covenants… again the likes that Paul references in Rom 9:4, period!


Obviously, the Ten Commandments were known before Moses.
1. Murder was wrong(Cain)
2. Theft was wrong( Joseph ad the silver cup)
3. Adultery was wrong(The incident between Sarah, Abraham and the Pharaoh)
etc. etc.There are many other examples to show that these commandments were operative and that there were consequences for not following them.
LLC
 
Posts: 696
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 9:45 am

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby davo » Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:41 am

davo wrote:
LLC wrote:
davo wrote:Deut 5:3 The Lord did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, those who are here today, all of us who are alive


The fathers being referred to in this verse may be the Egyptians, as many of these people were raised in Egyptian ways and were probably of mixed blood.

The fathers here were NOT the Egyptians BUT likewise Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and as such they DID NOT have this covenant aka… the 10 Commandments, being given here TO MOSES. These texts speak of DIFFERENT covenants… again the likes that Paul references in Rom 9:4, period!

LLC wrote:Obviously, the Ten Commandments were known before Moses.
1. Murder was wrong(Cain)
2. Theft was wrong( Joseph ad the silver cup)
3. Adultery was wrong(The incident between Sarah, Abraham and the Pharaoh)
etc. etc.There are many other examples to show that these commandments were operative and that there were consequences for not following them.

    :shock: What is it about… “The Lord did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us,…” are you NOT seeing :?:
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby qaz » Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:10 am

Yeah, I'm kinda confused as to what's LLC's motivation for not seeing the Mosaic covenant as divinely instituted.
qaz
 
Posts: 1301
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby Holy-Fool-P-Zombie » Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:20 am

qaz wrote:Yeah, I'm kinda confused as to what's LLC's motivation for not seeing the Mosaic covenant as divinely instituted.


Could it be because the Israelites didn't have glasses invented then? Therefore, they might not have seen things too clearly :?: ;)

Image
Charismatic Eastern Anglo-Catholic & Holy Fool; Inclusivist / Hopeful Universalist / Conditionalist / Nicene & Apostles Creeds;
Contemplation (i.e. Fox Golden Key, Mindfulness, Theosis, Yoga); Healing (i.e. Homeopathy, Kampo / TCM, Ayurveda, Spiritual);
User avatar
Holy-Fool-P-Zombie
 
Posts: 2596
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:30 pm
Location: Near Chicago or hanging out with Holy Fools, Zombies, P-Zombies, Nerds and Geeks

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby maintenanceman » Fri Sep 15, 2017 2:59 pm

Randy said:
Could it be because the Israelites didn't have glasses invented then? Therefore, they might not have seen things too clearly


That is surely one way of putting it! :D
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 1122
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby LLC » Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:02 pm

Randy, you crack me up! :lol:

Davo, I explained my take on the verse you point out. The Israelites were in Egypt for hundreds of years, being raised in Egyptian ways. In this sense the Egyptians were their fathers. Since you don't agree, what is your explanation of this verse:

Deut. 7:12 'Then it shall come to pass, because you listen to these judgments and keep and do them, that the Lord your God WILL KEEP WITH YOU THE COVENANT AND THE MERCY WHICH HE SWORE TO YOUR FATHERS."

MM, No I don't believe the institution of animal sacrifices, rituals, ceremonies, traditions etc., which were part of the Jewish law, came from God. My question to this is: Why would God bring them out of bondage only to put them in bondage under the law?

As all the prophets, Jesus, and the writers of the New Testament say, they were but doctrines of men.
LLC
 
Posts: 696
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 9:45 am

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby davo » Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:48 pm

LLC wrote:Davo, I explained my take on the verse you point out. The Israelites were in Egypt for hundreds of years, being raised in Egyptian ways. In this sense the Egyptians were their fathers. Since you don't agree, what is your explanation of this verse:

Deut. 7:12 'Then it shall come to pass, because you listen to these judgments and keep and do them, that the Lord your God WILL KEEP WITH YOU THE COVENANT AND THE MERCY WHICH HE SWORE TO YOUR FATHERS."

That verse references the covenant blessing of land & linage made with Abraham and summarily reiterated with Isaac and Jacob; as likewise here being self-evident by the following verse…
Deut 7:13 And He will love you and bless you and multiply you; He will also bless the fruit of your womb and the fruit of your land, your grain and your new wine and your oil, the increase of your cattle and the offspring of your flock, in the land of which He swore to your fathers to give you.

Listen LLC… as the bible shows (as I have provided adequate evidence), there were numerous covenants in train covering various things at various times — any honest reading of the text with see this. That you want to expunge from the text passages and portions of scripture demonstrating this fact is fine, you’re not the first here to demonstrate that doctrinal position counts for more than does faithfulness to the text; if that works for you… have at it — I can only provide what the texts actually say.
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby DaveB » Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:17 pm

I just dug out a book that I'd read some years ago when I was a member of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church - my 'Calvin' phase. The book is called "Covenants" and it was written by O. Palmer Robertson, a Calvinist theologian.

Just to add a little spice to the thread, I will list the various covenants Roberston finds in Scripture:
1. The Covenant of Creation
2. Adam: the Covenant of Commencement
3. Noah: the Covenant of Preservation
4. Abraham: the Covenant of Promise
5. Moses: the Covenant of Law
6. David: the Covenant of the Kingdom
7. Christ: the Covenant of Consummation

I remember as I read it thinking that this short study on Covenants had really opened my eyes to a structural element of the OT especially that would help me in future studies, and it has.

I'm not sure of the point(s) of disagreement being discussed above, I"m just plugging the book as a good 'un.

As a note, I don't agree with Robertson's theology much at all; but he did a good job with this book.
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 3808
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby davo » Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:46 pm

DaveB… just pulled that book off my shelf, seems I read it way back in 1995 :o :lol:
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby DaveB » Fri Sep 15, 2017 9:31 pm

Yeah, it was '94 or '95 for me as well. I think it was the same year I read J. Marcellus Kik's An Eschatology of Victory - a preterist commentary of sorts. Is that one familiar to you?
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 3808
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby davo » Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:04 pm

Lol… I was brought up a dyed-in the-wool amillennialist, which in Baptist circles here in Oz was at the time pretty rare as they were traditionally dispensationalist. My old man was the local Baptist reverend and didn’t mind being a bit of a stick-in-the-mud when it came to “accepted” theology and eschatology was a big one for him (wonder where I got it from ;). In my mid+ 20’s I realised I knew why I wasn’t a dispensationalist but I couldn’t answer why I wasn’t in particular a post-millennialist… so began my journey and J. Marcellus Kik’s ‘An Eschatology of Victory was my first foray in that direction to where I am today. The more I read it the more I found myself agreeing with what I was reading and on a few occasions I had to double-check the start of the book to just make sure I’d read that it was “postmill” lol. Similar in a lot of ways to a-mill but way more positive in its overall outlook… and back then that really grabbed my imagination.
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby LLC » Sat Sep 16, 2017 2:54 am

Davo, the covenant has always been about land and lineage which comes from the beginning.
Genesis 1:27-28 'So God created man in His own image...Then God said to them, 'Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth."

It is all a matter of what they had to do to inherit the earth and continue to live and prosper. This is also stated in Genesis, "So God created man in His own image. To fulfill the covenant, one has to walk according to God and live in righteousness. Jesus was an example of such a man. I believe that the word He gave us came from the beginning and has not changed.
LLC
 
Posts: 696
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 9:45 am

Re: Answering Objections To Penal Substitution

Postby LLC » Sat Sep 16, 2017 7:55 pm

qaz wrote:Yeah, I'm kinda confused as to what's LLC's motivation for not seeing the Mosaic covenant as divinely instituted.


qaz, I do see the Mosaic covenant as divinely inspired. However, the Mosaic covenant was not what many people think it is (animal sacrifices, rituals, ceremonies, etc. etc.). 1 Corinthians 10:4 tells us what the covenant was. " They all ate the same spiritual food(the bread of heaven) and drank the same spiritual drink( living water) from the spiritual Rock that followed accompanied them and that Rock was Christ."

In other words, they were taught the SAME thing that Jesus taught. They were to keep it and teach it to their children as Moses said to Aaron "Take a jar, put an omerful of manna in it, and place it before the Lord to be kept throughout your generations. However, as it is written, "the law was added because of transgressions". God did not add to the word. On the contrary,the transgression was adding to the word as it says in Deut. 4:2 "You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you nor take anything from it that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you."

As I pointed out before, Galatians 4:21-31 speaks of two covenants. There was only ONE true covenant. The other was man made and came from Mount Sinai of Arabia which was not the mountain of God, as it says in Exodus 3:12 'So He said, 'I will certainly be with you and this shall be a sign to you that I have sent you: Ehen you have brought the people out of Egypt, you shall serve God on THIS mountain ( HOREB)."
LLC
 
Posts: 696
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 9:45 am

Previous

Return to Biblical Theology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests