I’m Just Sayin’…..
“When the ground of justification moves from Christ outside of us to the work of Christ inside of us, the gospel (and the human soul) is imperiled. It is an upside down gospel.”
~ John Piper
“When the ground of justification moves from Christ outside of us to the work of Christ inside of us, the gospel (and the human soul) is imperiled. It is an upside down gospel.”
~ John Piper
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
“Do all you folks believe that Jesus did not act as a penal substitute for believers so that he was JUDICIALLY SEPARATED from the Father and suffered in his infinite person the equivalent of what we deserved as sinners?”
Bill writes:
” God the Father was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself. The Trinity has always been together, always will be together, in an unbreakable alliance. The Unity is eternally unchangeable! One God, now and forever. Amen
Thank you, Bill. I get so weary of trying to parse their very confusing declarations. one thing I have noticed throughout it all is a tampering of the Trinity that is very subtle but very serious. If we stick to what you wrote above, we can stay on track. I found a huge problem with many Reformed over the doctrine of ESS. (Eternal Subordination of the Son) where they declare a pecking order in the Trinity for eternity past and future….outside the Incarnation.
LikeLike
So then there was no judicial separation between the Father and the Son when the Father made him who knew no sin to be sin for us?
LikeLike
Judicial Separation?
My further thoughts on the Mystery of the Atonement:
It seems to me that if Christ was actually “Judicially Separated” from the Father, not in conformity with the Law, that would mean Christ sinned and fell into spiritual death like Adam. (Note too that Adam also experienced physical corruption and death when sin came into the world.) This I know, in dieing on the cross, Christ was at every point in humble obedience to the Father’s plan. Spiritual and Judicial Unity remained throughout the atonement and Christ “knew no sin.” Christ was given a passable body (capable of death) and was put to death in the body, not spiritual death. Since He “knew no sin,” death could not hold Him down, His body saw no corruption, therefore – God raised Him in Resurrection! Christ was raised from the dead (first born from the dead) and exalted because of His humble obedience, “He loved righteousness and hated wickedness.” He was “declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.” This proves His divine nature, begotten of the Father, and incapable of sin. His unblemished Body and precious, unstained, shed Blood was the offering of sacrifice making satisfaction for our sin. The resurrection was proof that Christ was the prophesied Sinless, Immanuel (God With Us), Holy Messiah who would judge all men.
But then there’s the mystery: “to be sin for us.” What does it mean? How close was the association with our sin. He certainly made an association with us miserable sinners in taking our place (the Righteous for the Unrighteous). He certainly took the punishment and physical death. We can say He took an unjust hit from the devil and defeated him too for our sakes. We can say He purchased, redeemed, bought back, men for God from every tribe, nation, and language. I can’t fill in all the gaps there. I hit a wall in my understanding, can’t go further. Nevertheless, what Christ did, for sure, made full satisfaction for sin with the Father.
That’s all I know. Anybody see any flaws here?
Arkansas Bill
LikeLike
I suppose some might argue against an Innocent Victim model of the Atonement. They might say Christ (“he who knew no sin to be sin for us”) took on sin, joining in our “Covenant with Death” (Is 28:18). Hence, a ledger change occurred in Heaven (Judicial Separation), and Christ was seen and “Declared Guilty” by the Father! After death, Christ would have gone to the Hades side of Hell (place of the dead), not the Paradise side with Abraham. For He was a Guilty Victim in this model of the Atonement.
Well…doesn’t make much sense to me. Any takers on that one?
Arkansas Bill
LikeLike
Finishing The Atonement, seeing there is no feedback:
I conclude that the verse below is not talking about a Lamb of God who filled up on the sin and guilt of fallen man to the point that He himself was sinful and fallen like us.
2 Corinthians 5:21
New International Version (NIV)
“21 God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.”
I conclude from the verse below that Christ came in a form like us fallen men, but he did not sin and was not ever fallen like us. Therefore, Christ was never reprobated.
Philippians 2:6-11
New International Version (NIV)
” 6 Who, being in very nature[a] God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature[b] of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.”
I conclude by the verse below that no sin was ever associated with Christ’s person because He was a Lamb without blemish. Jesus Christ was truly – God of God, light of light, very God of very God, not the author, not the source, nor the cause of sin. He was indeed THE SON OF GOD, my Lord and my God!
1 Peter 1:18-20
New International Version (NIV)
“18 For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your ancestors, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. 20He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake.”
Arkansas Bill
LikeLike
Thanks for this Bill–will be printing all of them out and going where there is a sane place to read .
LikeLike
Atonement? One more thought this morning.
I had drilled into my head, years ago, (the preaching of Russel McKnight of Faith Bible Church, OKC) that when the Bible says “sin was found in you,” it’s always a reference to a created being. In other words, sin is never found in God. Again, as Russel said repeatedly: God is not the author, nor the source, nor the cause of sin!
Now, taking that principle, apply it to the Atonement Model. It’s the Innocent Victim Model that remains standing by default. Christ, not being a created being, does not fit the Guilty Victim Model.
1 Peter 2:22
“He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth.”
Arkansas Bill
LikeLike
Bill,
There is something that I stumbled on in regard to this that I want to share with you.
LikeLike
Paul,
is it about this Atonement discussion? Sure, I’d love to hear it. E-mail if you like. I know this Atonement stuff has probably gotten a bit off-track for the blog. Didn’t intend to go this way, but it sure has turned into an interesting subject for me. I’m learning. It’s got my interest way up!
The other day someone told me to check all the R.C. Sproul U-Tubes on Double Imputation. I watched wondering this: How is all this Imputation of our sin, credited to Jesus Christ, fitting in with THE DOCTRINES OF GOD?
John 17 shows the eternal Love the Father has for the Son. Why would one member of the Trinity turn on another member by Imputing sin? We know what sin does. Would the Father ever disown the Son?
2 Timothy 2:13 NIV)
13 if we are faithless,
he remains faithful,
for he cannot disown himself.
God upholds His Name above all things. Why would sin be credited to Jesus Christ’s Name?
God never lies (Titus 1:2). It’s impossible (Heb 6:18). God can’t sin because He’s pure light, no darkness; pure Love. The Trinitarian Oneness of the Three persons never breaks. The “Doctrines of God” tell us this.
I was told that historically there’s never been a big Ecumenical Council on this, not even Rome or the Eastern Church. It looks like we’ve got some work to do. The Church is all over the map on the Atonement.
Want to write another book? This research can take a man into some strange places. Ha!
Arkansas Bill
LikeLike
No, no, atonement good, trying to get time to send you the stuff. Did you know that Robert Gundry argued against imputation?
LikeLike
Anyway, it got Susan and I doing a search for specific Scripture stating that Christ’s righteousness or obedience was imputed to us. We are still looking. But lots of verses that say righteousness was counted to us by faith and that it is God’s righteousness.
LikeLike
Yeah, I know the atonement is good. I just have a problem with how some people are explaining it.
Thanks! I never heard of Robert Gundry, outside of my circles. I’ll look him up. I’ll be interested to read about his tar and feathering.
“The Storm Center of the Reformation,” “The Hinge of the Reformation,” and “The Article by which the Church Stands or Falls”….
No, I’m not surprise about your search. Knowing what’s behind me in my spiritual journey, I’m not surprised by much of anything anymore.
Arkansas Bill
LikeLike