|
|
Post by thelayman on Dec 29, 2022 13:52:00 GMT -8
I have run into something I used to think was novel several times recently. The last two times in has been in regard to something James White said in his debate with Roger Perkins sometime back. In that debate in answer to a question from Roger, White said that within the Trinity were "three centers of consciousness." To be fair, White is certainly not the first one to say that within the Trinity there are "three centers of consciousness," I have personally seen in on numerous occasions by any number of writers. Now, I have a problem with the wording, "center of consciousness" as it is ambiguous, I have no idea exactly what it means. To be fair once again, I have always assumed the writer meant that there are three distinctly self-conscious persons.
So what is it that I thought was just a novel teaching among Trinitarian models? Well, the teaching that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are not distinctly aware of one another, that they are not distinctly self-consciousness, that there can be no "I/you" relationship between them. Likewise, it is not unusual to see it asserted that Thomas Aquinas in the Summa made it clear that the three persons were not distinctly self-conscious (though I would say he made it clear that they are). This teaching looks for all the world to me like modalism (those teaching this seem to base their denial of modalism on the idea that they teach that the persons, which they would prefer to call "modes of existence," exist simultaneously though there can be no interaction between them as they possess no distinct self-consciousness). They also are adamant that this is the historic teaching of the Trinity, i.e. Classic Trinitarianism. Again, I don't think so. This is what I would call emphasizing the unity of essence to the exclusion of three really distinct persons. Usually the error is emphasizing the distinction of persons to the point that there can be no unity of essence.
What are your thoughts on this? Here are a few examples:
Here's a short one:
Here's a longer one:
It is interesting to note that in the comment section under the longer of the two videos a Oneness Pentecostal asked them to explain the difference in what they were teaching and what Oneness Pentecostals believed. There was no answer given.
TheLayman
|
|
|
|
Post by Parker on Dec 29, 2022 15:08:18 GMT -8
Very interesting topic, I'll have to do some studying on it. After I watch the videos. This is the first time I've ever heard of this but off the top of my head I would say each person in the trinity is distinct but not separate. In that they cooperate with each other for a common goal. So thanks for giving me something to study out. Found this What Is the Doctrine of the Trinity? They mentioned it in the second video. |
|
e v e
Full Member
Posts: 214
|
Post by e v e on Dec 29, 2022 16:44:20 GMT -8
God is our deity
and His Spirit is His core of love and our comforter and deity
and His son is Christ our captain and deity
who with His brothers will rule the new creation (eden)
they are three beautiful beings
aquinas was a greek minded thinker,
his summa was made with greek questions
and greek concepts in mind….
as a response to a fellow islamic aristotelian (averroes)
who he was of the same thinking of -
and admired… as a mentor.
the summa is not a christian text.
augustine and aquinas’ views of trinity are based
on greek theology
|
|
e v e
Full Member
Posts: 214
|
Post by e v e on Dec 29, 2022 16:45:53 GMT -8
the diagram above
…for the video….
is based on greek theology
it depicts a pagan concept.
|
|
|
|
Post by civic on Dec 30, 2022 6:54:55 GMT -8
I have run into something I used to think was novel several times recently. The last two times in has been in regard to something James White said in his debate with Roger Perkins sometime back. In that debate in answer to a question from Roger, White said that within the Trinity were "three centers of consciousness." To be fair, White is certainly not the first one to say that within the Trinity there are "three centers of consciousness," I have personally seen in on numerous occasions by any number of writers. Now, I have a problem with the wording, "center of consciousness" as it is ambiguous, I have no idea exactly what it means. To be fair once again, I have always assumed the writer meant that there are three distinctly self-conscious persons. So what is it that I thought was just a novel teaching among Trinitarian models? Well, the teaching that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are not distinctly aware of one another, that they are not distinctly self-consciousness, that there can be no "I/you" relationship between them. Likewise, it is not unusual to see it asserted that Thomas Aquinas in the Summa made it clear that the three persons were not distinctly self-conscious (though I would say he made it clear that they are). This teaching looks for all the world to me like modalism (those teaching this seem to base their denial of modalism on the idea that they teach that the persons, which they would prefer to call "modes of existence," exist simultaneously though there can be no interaction between them as they possess no distinct self-consciousness). They also are adamant that this is the historic teaching of the Trinity, i.e. Classic Trinitarianism. Again, I don't think so. This is what I would call emphasizing the unity of essence to the exclusion of three really distinct persons. Usually the error is emphasizing the distinction of persons to the point that there can be no unity of essence. What are your thoughts on this? Here are a few examples: It is interesting to note that in the comment section under the longer of the two videos a Oneness Pentecostal asked them to explain the difference in what they were teaching and what Oneness Pentecostals believed. There was no answer given. TheLayman
Good points brother and I agree with you. It reeks modalism as you pointed out. And welcome to the forum. I messaged you . |
|
|
|
Post by thelayman on Dec 30, 2022 6:57:42 GMT -8
Very interesting topic, I'll have to do some studying on it. After I watch the videos. This is the first time I've ever heard of this but off the top of my head I would say each person in the trinity is distinct but not separate. In that they cooperate with each other for a common goal. So thanks for giving me something to study out. Found this What Is the Doctrine of the Trinity? They mentioned it in the second video. Hello Parker. On both of these youtube channels I asked them to explain whether or not the Father and Holy Spirit also suffered on the cross since according to them the persons have only one-self awareness/self-consciousness between them (which belies the meaning of self-aware and/or self-consciousness). I could not get a straight answer. |
|
|
|
Post by civic on Dec 30, 2022 6:58:44 GMT -8
Very interesting topic, I'll have to do some studying on it. After I watch the videos. This is the first time I've ever heard of this but off the top of my head I would say each person in the trinity is distinct but not separate. In that they cooperate with each other for a common goal. So thanks for giving me something to study out. Found this What Is the Doctrine of the Trinity? They mentioned it in the second video. Hello Parker. On both of these youtube channels I asked them to explain whether or not the Father and Holy Spirit also suffered on the cross since according to them the persons have only one-self awareness/self-consciousness between them (which belies the meaning of self-aware and/or self-consciousness). I could not get a straight answer. Excellent question !!! Also I deal with that very question in the paper I wrote on the Trinity and the Atonement. |
|
|
|
Post by thelayman on Dec 30, 2022 12:50:51 GMT -8
So what are your thoughts on it civic? Can you share your paper here?
|
|
|
|
Post by civic on Dec 30, 2022 13:54:14 GMT -8
So what are your thoughts on it civic? Can you share your paper here? Its quite long I will in several posts, |
|
|
|
Post by civic on Dec 30, 2022 13:55:06 GMT -8
Part 1
The Nature of God in the Atonement
I. Introduction- Definition of theology, attributes and nature of God, Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53, and PSA (wrath of God arguments).
Thesis statement: Scripture does not teach that God’s wrath was poured out on Jesus.
II. Attributes of God and His unchanging nature.
III. Main Old Testament Passages where Penal Substitutionary Atonement is Derived From
A. Psalm 22
B. Isaiah 53
IV. New Testament Interpretation of Isaiah 53
A. Matthew 8:14-17;
B. Mark 15:27-32;
C. John 12:37-41;
D. Luke 22:35-38;
E. Acts 8:26-35;
F. Romans 10:11-21;
G. 1 Peter 2:19-25
V. Jesus as the Expiation for Sin in the Atonement
A. Propitiation
1. 1 John 2:2; 4:10
B. Expiation—Jesus provided forgiveness and covering sin. Use the Jesus “types” (The flood demonstrated the wrath of God whereas the Ark was the type of Jesus. The Ark did not receive God’s wrath—it protected Noah’s family from God’s wrath).
VI. Conclusion
This paper is about the Trinity, and the penal substitutionary theory of the atonement (e.g., PSA), as it relates to the nature and character of God. The word Theology refers to the study of God, and God is Triune, a Trinity- Tri-Unity. All doctrine begins with God at its starting point. God’s innate attributes are Aseity (God is self-sufficient), Infinite (without limit), Eternal (God has no beginning or end, he is timeless), Immutable (God is unchanging), Love (God is love), Holy (God is set-apart), Perichoresis (the indwelling of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit). Divine Simplicity states God is Love because He is Love, not because He possesses that quality. God is the center of all the Divine Attributes. They point to His Being. God is not distinct from His nature.
God is Love. In love, the Father sent the Son on our behalf to be the perfect sacrifice for sin. We Love because He first loved us and sent His Son as 1 John tells us.
We must understand how God's attributes all work in harmony together, not in opposition to each other. God's attributes and character flow from His love—for God is love.
God being love has nothing to do with His creation. That is secondary. God is love, and that love is perfect, lacking nothing within His Triune nature as God. Love, by definition, has to be expressed with another, which is why a unitarian god cannot be love. Love requires another to share and express that love, and it is what we see with the Triune God. God is love before anyone/anything existed.
Before creation, there was no sin. There was no judgment, wrath, mercy, grace, and justice. Why? Because those are God's secondary attributes concerning the creation and the fall. God's love is a primary attribute, like Holy is a primary one. Everything about God flows from His being Love which includes His secondary attributes, which were not in use until the creation and the fall.
The messianic passage of Psalm 22 was played out before their very eyes, and Jesus quotes the opening verse letting His persecutors know that He truly is the Son of God, the Messiah, by quoting Psalm 22. The passage was being lived out before all witnesses of the crucifixion. It is a proclamation and a declaration that He is the Messiah, God's One and Only Son who gave His life as a ransom for many.
What the Father did allow to happen and not rescue His Son from was His death and suffering from those wicked leaders to be our sacrifice for sin. The entire weight of that was upon Him to bear alone, but the Father never left Him. He was there hearing His prayers and answering them upon His death. Moreover, let us not forget Jesus' promise to the sinner, "Today, you will be with me in paradise (insert bible reference)." For God so loved the world that He gave His Only Begotten Son that whosoever believes in Him will not perish but have everlasting life. The Trinity was never fractured, broken, or severed for even a moment, but together, the Godhead accomplished salvation for sinners. It was a Triune effort that worked out to perfection as They had planned from the very beginning. Furthermore, when this reconciliation took place at the cross, we read that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself - 2 Corinthians 5:19. The book of Romans states that "God demonstrated His love for us that while we were still sinners Christ died for us" (5:8). So Jesus' sacrificial atonement both propitiates (turns away God’s wrath) and expiates (covers our sins). Gods’ wrath does not fall on the sacrifice. Scripture teaches us that sin was condemned in the flesh, not that Jesus was condemned (Romans 8:3).
Psalm 22
My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?
Far from my deliverance are the words of my groaning.
2 O my God, I cry by day, but You do not answer;
And by night, but I have no rest.
3 Yet You are holy,
O You who are enthroned upon the praises of Israel.
4 In You our fathers trusted;
They trusted and You delivered them.
5 To You they cried out and were delivered;
In You they trusted and were not disappointed.
6 But I am a worm and not a man,
A reproach of men and despised by the people.
7 All who see me sneer at me;
They separate with the lip, they wag the head, saying,
8 “Commit yourself to the LORD; let Him deliver him;
Let Him rescue him, because He delights in him.”
9 Yet You are He who brought me forth from the womb;
You made me trust when upon my mother’s breasts.
10 Upon You I was cast from birth;
You have been my God from my mother’s womb.
11 Be not far from me, for trouble is near;
For there is none to help.
12 Many bulls have surrounded me;
Strong bulls of Bashan have encircled me.
13 They open wide their mouth at me,
As a ravening and a roaring lion.
14 I am poured out like water,
And all my bones are out of joint;
My heart is like wax;
It is melted within me.
15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
And my tongue cleaves to my jaws;
And You lay me in the dust of death.
16 For dogs have surrounded me;
A band of evildoers has encompassed me;
They pierced my hands and my feet.
17 I can count all my bones.
They look, they stare at me;
18 They divide my garments among them,
And for my clothing they cast lots.
19 But You, O LORD, be not far off;
O You my help, hasten to my assistance.
20 Deliver my soul from the sword,
My only life from the power of the dog.
21 Save me from the lion’s mouth;
From the horns of the wild oxen You answer me.
22 I will tell of Your name to my brethren;
In the midst of the assembly I will praise You.
23 You who fear the LORD, praise Him;
All you descendants of Jacob, glorify Him,
And stand in awe of Him, all you of Israel.
24 For He has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted;
Nor has He hidden His face from him;
But when he cried to Him for help, He heard.
25 From You comes my praise in the great assembly;
I shall pay my vows before those who fear Him.
26 The afflicted will eat and be satisfied;
Those who seek Him will praise the LORD.
Let your heart live forever!
27 All the ends of the earth will remember and turn to the LORD,
And all the families of the nations will worship before You.
28 For the kingdom is the LORD’S
And He rules over the nations.
29 All the prosperous of the earth will eat and worship,
All those who go down to the dust will bow before Him,
Even he who cannot keep his soul alive.
30 Posterity will serve Him;
It will be told of the Lord to the coming generation.
31 They will come and will declare His righteousness
To a people who will be born, that He has performed it.
There are eight points about God and Jesus' last words that are important to examine. Some people taught when Jesus said (My God My God why have Thou forsaken Me) that the Father departed, deserted, and turned His back upon His Son to bear God’s wrath on the cross. They teach from the pulpits that God is too Holy to look upon sin. However, is this teaching biblical? Is it true?
1-God is Triune- Tri-Unity
2- The Trinity cannot be broken, separated, or abandoned.
3- God does not send His wrath against God
4- Jesus is God
5- Context has meaning, and all the gospel accounts work together along with the O.T. quotations
6-In Luke 23:46, Jesus' last words were," Father into Thy hands I commit my Spirit."
7- Within Psalm 22, there are numerous details regarding Jesus' crucifixion. For example, Psalms 22 and the gospels say He was mocked, despised, hurled insults, cast lots, divided His clothes, let God rescue Him. Further, Psalm 22:24 also says God has not despised Him nor hidden His face from Him and listened to His cry for help.
8- Psalm 22:24 coincides with Jesus' trust and relationship with the Father when he states, "Into your hands, I commit MY Spirit."
|
|
|
|
Post by civic on Dec 30, 2022 13:56:02 GMT -8
Part 2
Though often taught from the pulpit and widely accepted within Christianity, there is a common misnomer that God cannot look upon sin.
This misnomer or idea is rooted in a misunderstanding of Habakkuk 1:13, which states, "Your eyes are too pure to look upon evil." To expand upon the meaning of this verse, God cannot look at sin favorably or with complacency. However, this verse does not state that God cannot look at sin or that He cannot allow sin in His presence. God did not turn His back on Adam when he sinned--God sought him out. God did not turn His back on David when he sinned. In the book of Job, God allowed satan in His presence for a specific purpose. Satan wanted to make a deal with God over His servant, Job. God restricted Satan, telling him that he "can do anything but touch Job" and not to "lay a hand or finger on him." In the wilderness, Jesus allowed the presence of satan (face to face).
Jesus did not turn His back on Saul when he was persecuting the church and sought him out on the Damascus Road and said to him," why are you persecuting Me?" If God did not turn His back on sinners, then neither did the Father turn His back on His only Son who is Holy, Blameless, Sinless, and Righteous just like His Father. The Father turning His back on the Son (at the cross) is not found in Scripture. Jesus ate with sinners, lived among sinners, loves sinners and He suffered and died for sinners.
Wrath- strongs 3709 ὀργή is defined in the Greek lexicon as anger, retribution, vengeance, and indignation. God is not against Himself angrily displaying wrath from the Father to the Son. God is love. In love, He sent His Son. The wrath bearing Son is a new concept not found in Scripture nor the early church fathers (ECFs). God is not against Himself. No one in the Trinity is in opposition, no conflict, no dissension, no strife, no disunity, no dysfunction. As if God were somehow like a sinful human family. There is nothing broken in Our Blessed Trinity.
Jesus bearing God’s wrath and being despised and forsaken by the Father and Him turning His back on the Son is not found in the pages of Scripture. That doctrine was developed in the dark ages during the Reformation and called Penal Substitution Theory of the Atonement or PSA.
Calvin's comments on Galatians 3:13,
"He could not cease to be the object of his Father’s love, and yet he endured his wrath. For how could he reconcile the Father to us, if he had incurred his hatred and displeasure? We conclude, that he “did always those things that pleased” (John 8:29) his Father. Again, how would he have freed us from the wrath of God, if he had not transferred it from us to himself? Thus, “he was wounded for our transgressions,” (Isaiah 53:5,) and had to deal with God as an angry judge."
The following scriptures affirm that Jesus' relationship with the Father on the cross was still there and not broken.
Psalm 22:24
For he has not despised or scorned
the suffering of the afflicted one;
he has not hidden his face from him
but has listened to his cry for help.
Luke 23:46
Jesus called out with a loud voice, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." When he had said this, he breathed his last.
John 16:32
"A time is coming and in fact has come when you will be scattered, each to your own home. You will leave me all alone. Yet I am not alone, for my Father is with me."
Hebrews 5:7
During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with fervent cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission.
Jesus' promise to the thief on the cross that today you will be with Me in Paradise reaffirms Jesus went to be with the Father and not suffer in hell as some teach.
Jesus bearing God's “cup of wrath” and being despised and forsaken by the Father and Him turning His back on the Son is not found in Scripture.
In Matthew 26:39, Jesus says, "If it be your will, let this cup pass from me." Jesus tells us precisely what the cup was. It was the cup of his suffering, which meant that He would die an agonizing death as a martyr. In the passage below, Jesus told His disciples that they would also drink of the same "cup":
Matthew 20:17-
Now Jesus was going up to Jerusalem. On the way, he took the Twelve aside and said to them, 18 “We are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and the teachers of the law. They will condemn him to death 19 and will hand him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and crucified. On the third day he will be raised to life!”20 Then the mother of Zebedee’s sons came to Jesus with her sons and, kneeling down, asked a favor of him. 21 “What is it you want?” he asked. She said, "Grant that one of these two sons of mine may sit at your right and the other at your left in your kingdom."22 “You don’t know what you are asking,” Jesus said to them. “Can you drink the cup I am going to drink?” “We can,” they answered. 23 Jesus said to them, “You will indeed drink from my cup, but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared by my Father.”
1 Thessalonians 5:9-For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.
As we see above it was not the cup of wrath Jesus was speaking about but it was the suffering He was going to have to endure for our sins. God has not appointed us to wrath and the cup means the suffering of Jesus and that the disciples would also suffer death as martyrs. In fact, many scriptures testify that believers too will suffer persecution for being a follower of Jesus. Suffering persecution is a promise for a believer who follows Jesus, it is something we should expect to happen in our life.
2 Timothy 3:12- Yes, and everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution.
John 15:20
Remember the word that I spoke to you: 'No servant is greater than his master.' If they persecuted Me, they will persecute you as well; if they kept My word, they will keep yours as well.
Matthew 5:10 - Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
2 Corinthians 4:9- persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed.
Wrath from God is not required for the forgiveness of sins, that is a misnomer.
Exodus 34:6
Then the LORD passed by in front of him and proclaimed, “The LORD, the LORD God, compassionate and merciful, slow to anger, and abounding in faithfulness and truth;
Isaiah 48:9
For the sake of My name I will delay My wrath; for the sake of My praise I will restrain it, so that you will not be cut off.
Psalm 78:38
And yet He was compassionate; He forgave their iniquity and did not destroy them. He often restrained His anger and did not unleash His full wrath.
Psalm 85:1-3
You, LORD, showed favor to your land;
you restored the fortunes of Jacob.
2 You forgave the iniquity of your people
and covered all their sins.
3 You set aside all your wrath
and turned from your fierce anger.
The wrath of God (Isaiah 53)
Within the study of the doctrine on PSA, the central O.T. passage it comes from is found in Isaiah 53. Let us look at how the N.T. quotes Isaiah 53 and see how the N.T. writers viewed the passages and used them in the N.T. and what language from Isaiah 53 they applied to Jesus in the N.T. regarding suffering.
In doing so, a few things stand out. There is no penal aspect/ language Isaiah used that is carried over in the N.T. but that of substitution. Isaiah 53:4- WE (not God) considered Him punished by God. The following NT passages quote Isaiah 53: Matthew 8:14-17; Mark 15:27-32; John 12:37-41; Luke 22:35-38; Acts 8:26-35; Romans 10:11-21; and 1 Peter 2:19-25. Not one of them uses any penal language where PSA gets its doctrine from in Isaiah 53 in the New Testament.
Atonement- katallagé καταλλαγή -reconciliation, restoration to favor. Strongs 2643.
Thayers: adjustment of a difference, reconciliation, restoration to favor, (from Aeschylus on); in the N. T., of the restoration of the favor of God to sinners that repent and put their trust in the expiatory death of Christ: 2 Corinthians 5:18f; with the genitive of the one received into favor, τοῦ κόσμου (opposed to ἀποβολή), Romans 11:15; καταλλαγήν ἐλάβομεν, we received the blessing of the recovered favor of God, Romans 5:11; with the genitive of him whose favor is recovered, 2 Macc. 5:20. (Cf. Trench, § lxxvii.)
Romans 5:11- And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement. KJV
Romans 5:11- And not only this, but we also exult in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation. NASB
1 Corinthians 5:7 say the following: For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. This means just like the firstborn were spared by the blood on the posts of their doors from God’s wrath so to are we passed over Gods wrath from the blood of Jesus. The blood of Jesus provides forgiveness of sins and God’s wrath like with the Israelites are passed over and it falls upon the wicked, not those covered and protected by the blood of the Lamb. Gods’ wrath as Romans 1 declares is still being poured out upon sin and ungodliness and the bowls of Gods wrath and punishment is still yet to come. So, if Jesus bore Gods’ wrath for sinners, then why is God’s wrath still being poured out now and in the future if in the Atonement Gods wrath was satisfied? The fact is Jesus did not bear God’s wrath on the cross because it still exists and is being poured out in the bowls of Revelation before His 2nd Coming.
Romans 1:18
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness
Romans 5:9- Therefore, since we have now been justified by His blood, how much more shall we be saved from wrath through Him!
Colossians 3:6-Because of these, the wrath of God is coming on the sons of disobedience.
Ephesians 5:6- Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things the wrath of God is coming on the sons of disobedience
1 Thessalonians 1:10- and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.
|
|
|
|
Post by civic on Dec 30, 2022 13:56:46 GMT -8
Part 3
Propitiation- the turning away of God's anger/wrath
Expiation- the covering for our sins
Through expiation—the work of Christ on the cross for us—the sin of all those who would ever believe in Christ was canceled. That cancellation is eternal in its consequence, even though sin is still present in the temporal sense. In other words, believers are delivered from the penalty and power of sin, but not the presence of it. Justification is the term for being delivered from the penalty of sin. This is a one-time act wherein the sinner is justified and made holy and righteous in the eyes of God, who exchanged our sinful natures for the righteousness of Christ at the cross (2 Corinthians 5:21). Sanctification is the ongoing process whereby believers are delivered from the power of sin in their lives and are enabled by the new nature to resist and turn away from it. Glorification is when we are removed from the very presence of sin, which will only occur once we leave this world and are in heaven. All these processes—justification, sanctification, and glorification—are made possible through the expiation or cancellation of sin. (gotquestions.org)
Propitiation vs. Expiation- The New Testament usage of hilaskomai and hilasmos, consistent with its precedent usage in the Greek Old Testament, speaks consistently of God’s atoning action in Christ directed toward sin on behalf of sinners, not human action directed toward God to satisfy God. The criterion for interpretation, Stott has said, “is whether the object of the atoning action is God or man.” “Propitiation” indicates an action by humans directed toward God, and “expiation” indicates an action by God toward sin and sinners. According to Stott's criterion, these texts favor "expiation" over “propitiation.” Given the choice of translating hilastērion either “propitiation” or “expiation,” therefore, “expiation” is preferable based on the textual evidence of both the New Testament and the Greek Old Testament. James Dunn summarizes well the case for preferring “expiation” to “propitiation” as a translation for hilastērion: Darrin W. Snyder Belousek, Atonement, Justice, and Peace: The Message of the Cross and the Mission of the Church (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2012), 247–252.
So, as we see, the Tri-Unity of God is eternal, and the Father / Son relationship remained perfect through the crucifixion of Jesus. Our Triune God perfectly accomplished the atonement and our salvation through Jesus suffering for our sins on the cross, and His Resurrection from the dead gave Him and the church victory over sin, death, the devil, and the world.
Purification for sin- καθαρισμός- katharismos: a cleansing, purifying, purification, expiation. Strongs 2512.
Thayers: a cleansing from the guilt of sins (see καθαρίζω, 1 b. β.): wrought now by baptism, 2 Peter 1:9, now by the expiatory sacrifice of Christ, Hebrews 1:3 on which cf. Kurtz, Commentary, p. 70; (Exodus 30:10; τῆς ἁμαρτίας μου, Job 7:21; of an atonement, Lucian, asin. 22)
Hebrews 1:3-And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high;
Purification for sin is in the blood of Christ in the Atonement
Matthew 26:26-29
While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.”
27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”
Hebrews 9:22
Because all things are purged by blood in The Written Law, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
Leviticus 4:20,26,35
And he shall do with the bullock as he did with the bullock for a sin offering, so shall he do with this: and the priest shall make an atonement for them, and it shall be forgiven them
Leviticus 6:7
And the priest shall make an atonement for him before the LORD: and it shall be forgiven him for any thing of all that he hath done in trespassing therein.
Leviticus 17:11
For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for your souls upon the altar; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.
Hebrews 9
Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary. 2 A tabernacle was set up. In its first room were the lampstand and the table with its consecrated bread; this was called the Holy Place. 3 Behind the second curtain was a room called the Most Holy Place, 4 which had the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant. This ark contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron’s staff that had budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant. 5 Above the ark were the cherubim of the Glory, overshadowing the atonement cover. But we cannot discuss these things in detail now. 6 When everything had been arranged like this, the priests entered regularly into the outer room to carry on their ministry. 7 But only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed in ignorance. 8 The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still functioning. 9 This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. 10 They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings—external regulations applying until the time of the new order.
The forgiveness of sins is found only in the blood of Christ- His life which He gave as a sacrifice for sin. That is the heart of the Atonement. It is what the New Covenant is found upon His blood, His life which was given for our sins. Forgiveness is only found in His blood that He gave His life on our behalf. That is how are sins are removed and taken away. That is what the Law required for sin was the blood of the animal sacrifice.
There is no "punishment" above anywhere. There is a sacrifice provided which covers and provides forgiveness of sins. The entire book of Hebrews is built upon the OT Law and how it is fulfilled in Christ.
Jesus said He gave His life as a Ransom . Strongs 3038- Lutron λύτρον. the purchasing money for manumitting slaves, a ransom, the price of ransoming; especially the sacrifice by which expiation is effected, an offering of expiation. Thayers: λύτρον, λύτρου, τό (λύω), the Sept. passim for כֹּפֶר, גְּאֻלָּה, פִּדְיון, etc.; the price for redeeming, ransom (paid for slaves, Leviticus 19:20; for captives, Isaiah 45:13; for the ransom of a life, Exodus 21:30; Numbers 35:31f): ἀντί πολλῶν, to liberate many from the misery and penalty of their sins, Matthew 20:28; Mark 10:45. (Pindar, Aeschylus, Xenophon, Plato, others.)
Matthew 20:28- just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many
|
|
|
|
Post by civic on Dec 30, 2022 13:57:35 GMT -8
Part 4hilastērion – the atonement is received by Faith.Romans 3:25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, 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. NIV Romans 3:25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. ESV The Atonement is received by faith. The offering of the Atonement for sin cannot be obtained apart from faith. The atonement for sin has been made and it cannot be applied to mankind apart from faith. Jesus has made an atonement for sin but it produces no reconciliation, no pardon from sin, no remission of sin unless is accepted or received by faith. The fallacy of the sufficient for all, efficient for some with the Atonement.We must go back to the gospel and what the scriptures teach about the good news of Jesus death, burial and resurrection as defined in 1 Corinthians 15. 1 Corinthians 15:17- And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. The passage declares if Christ is not risen, raised from the dead, resurrected then our faith is in vain and we are still dead in our sins. We are saved by His life/Resurrection not His death. His death atoned for sin but does not give life.Romans 4:24-25 but also for us, to whom God will credit righteousness—for us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. 25 He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification. Paul declares in Romans 5:10 the following: For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! Cf Acts 17:31. John 11:25-26 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die; 26 and whoever lives by believing in me will never die. Do you believe this?” We know that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of Christ. Romans 10:17. We know that God saves those who believe – 1 Corinthians 1:21. We know that we receive the spirit and are sealed with the spirit through belief in the gospel- Ephesians 1:13. Sin is the transgression of the law- 1 John 3:4. Sin is known thorough/by the law- Romans 7:7. The law is a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ- Galatians 3:24-25. Where there is no law there is no transgression of the law- Romans 4:14. Sin is not counted against anyone when there is no law. Romans 5:13. In Colossians 2:13-15 we read the following: When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross. 15 And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross. Ephesians 2:14-15: For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, 16 and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 2 Corinthians 5:18-20: All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19 that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. 20 We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. So, we see from the above scriptures it’s not sin perse that keeps the sinner from God it is unbelief. Faith is the issue. In Romans 5:1-2 we read the following: Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we boast in the hope of the glory of God Its unbelief that keeps one from salvation and places them under condemnation. This is taught throughout the N.T. gospels and epistles. Here we see what Jesus and Paul declared below. John 3:18: Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. John 3:36: Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them Romans 11:20: Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Hebrews 3:19: So, we see that they were not able to enter, because of their unbelief. Cf Heb 4:6- unbelief ConclusionAs we have seen reading through these O.T. passages quoted in the N.T., we discover that the N.T. does not use the penal language that was developed during the Reformation in the dark ages as that was how that culture during that time had dealt with people in their judicial system punishing those who disagreed with them, torture and death were a result for many who went against their theology. That was the mentality of those who developed the doctrine we have today called the PSA atonement. There are many aspects and theories of the atonement that contain truth, and no one theory is 100% correct. There are many different views and aspects to the atonement within orthodoxy. The N.T. writers' emphasis on the atonement is on the side of expiation rather than propitiation, which is only used twice in the epistle of 1 John. Gods’ wrath is still future and will judge those who reject His Sons atonement for sin. Gods’ wrath was not poured out on the Son for sin otherwise there would be no future wrath from God because of sin. The viewpoint in this paper brings out the fact that Jesus’ atonement was done in love which provided covering and forgiveness of sins. And this view harmonizes with God’s wrath that is still yet to come and was not poured out on Jesus on the cross. Our loving God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezekiel 33:11). Our loving Father took pleasure to bruise His Son to reconcile us to God as an offering for our sins. (Isaiah 53:10). Final thoughts- its faith in the Son through the message of the gospel that saves and unbelief which condemns. The gospel is for all mankind, all the world, for everyone. God desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. (1 Timothy 2:4). God is the Savior of all men, especially of believers (1 Timothy. 4:10), For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to everyone (Titus 2:11) For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all (Romans 11:32). The Lord is not slow in keeping His promise as some understand slowness, but is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish but everyone to come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). God sent His Son into the world to take away the sin of the world (John 1:29) and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for sins of the whole world. (1 John 2:2). and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again (2 Corinthians 5:15). But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone. (Hebrews 2:9) hope this helps !!! 
|
|
|
|
Post by Parker on Dec 30, 2022 14:20:43 GMT -8
I have run into something I used to think was novel several times recently. The last two times in has been in regard to something James White said in his debate with Roger Perkins sometime back. In that debate in answer to a question from Roger, White said that within the Trinity were "three centers of consciousness." To be fair, White is certainly not the first one to say that within the Trinity there are "three centers of consciousness," I have personally seen in on numerous occasions by any number of writers. Now, I have a problem with the wording, "center of consciousness" as it is ambiguous, I have no idea exactly what it means. To be fair once again, I have always assumed the writer meant that there are three distinctly self-conscious persons. So what is it that I thought was just a novel teaching among Trinitarian models? Well, the teaching that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are not distinctly aware of one another, that they are not distinctly self-consciousness, that there can be no "I/you" relationship between them. Likewise, it is not unusual to see it asserted that Thomas Aquinas in the Summa made it clear that the three persons were not distinctly self-conscious (though I would say he made it clear that they are). This teaching looks for all the world to me like modalism (those teaching this seem to base their denial of modalism on the idea that they teach that the persons, which they would prefer to call "modes of existence," exist simultaneously though there can be no interaction between them as they possess no distinct self-consciousness). They also are adamant that this is the historic teaching of the Trinity, i.e. Classic Trinitarianism. Again, I don't think so. This is what I would call emphasizing the unity of essence to the exclusion of three really distinct persons. Usually the error is emphasizing the distinction of persons to the point that there can be no unity of essence. What are your thoughts on this? Here are a few examples: It is interesting to note that in the comment section under the longer of the two videos a Oneness Pentecostal asked them to explain the difference in what they were teaching and what Oneness Pentecostals believed. There was no answer given. TheLayman
Good points brother and I agree with you. It reeks modalism as you pointed out. And welcome to the forum. I messaged you . I Agree. It sounds like " Does the One God Have Three Different Modes?" That God is a single person who has revealed himself in three forms, or modes. I'm not buying it. |
|
|
|
Post by Parker on Dec 30, 2022 14:46:38 GMT -8
So what are your thoughts on it civic? Can you share your paper here? Its quite long I will in several posts, Now that's what I call a Bible study, Thanks for sharing it with us civic. |
|
