Featured Atonement

Actually I can. You say things that contradict yourself.

No, that is giving my honest observations. That is not a sin and I am highly offended by the statement and honestly you should have action taken against you.

I am being very honest. You have made contradicting statements. What I said is absolutely true. 1. Your logic is nonsense. 2. You have to do gymnastics to make it work in biblical interpretation. 3. You define justice on your own terms. Which part of that is not true? You are the one bearing false witness against me.

You didn't correct anything that I actually said. No it is not intentional sin. You are way out of line.

 

The bully pulpit of the moderator @JonC .... wow...

 

When did I say that? Who is being dishonest now?

Name the specific thing I said you believed that you did not affirm? This is the true false accusation. What did I say you actually believe?

You are going on these diatribes, calling me a liar, saying I am INTENTIONALLY SINNING with zero evidence to back up your claim. Point to the thing I said you believe that you don't.

 

I said that from the very post that you are arguing about. Good grief. I'm not apologizing for anything, if anything you should apologize to me for the false accusations that you just disproved yourself. I did not ascribe to you a belief you did not hold.

Claiming something is one thing, but your theology shows otherwise.

I'm going by what you have said. I'm not dictating anything. If you are offended, I'm not sure what I can do for you. You talk about the justice of God being God's but then refuse to see it as it is laid out in Scripture. Justice is that sin must be punished. Period. That is clear throughout Scripture.

You talk about propitiation and atonement but then say that doesn't go far enough? How do you define those words Jon? What do they actually mean?

This is where the gymnastics come in. You see Penal Substitution but you find ways to "reason" out of it.

 

I don't think anyone limits sin to the "act."

Is this not simply the moral "condition" or "being" evil? How can "being" evil be divorced from a "moral" condition?

But again, does this not have its root in a "moral" condition and "moral" acts toward both God and men?

How are you associating the "kingdom" (I assume the kingdom of God) with sin? I can associate sin with progressive santification within the kingdom. I can associate a moral act by Adam that devestates the physical kingdom wherein we live as God plainly stated that the "ground" is cursed due to his act of sin.

I think the only "systemic" issue is the pervasiveness that the moral nature of sin has in its consequential effects upon man, relationships and the world in which he lives.

Are you saying the "power" of sin preceded that "act" of sin? It is true that sin has "power" but from whence does that power orignate if not from spiritual submission to Satan?

Eph. 2:2....according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

Does not the "power" originate with demonic forces (1 Tim. 4:1; 2 Cor.4:1-3) that operate freely within their own kingdom?

 

Still I don't get your connection with regard to the moral question of sin unless you are simply referring to the progressive application of redemption from sin in the soul and body of man?

Is not this merely consequential to the willful submission to Satan's revealed will over God's will, thus willfully subjugating yourself to his rule (power) and therefore not a matter of the nature of sin or even a matter of a question about "morality" but rather a question of initial submission by Adam to the kingdom/power of Satan providing him the right to enforce his rule over his own kingdom?

The doctor said I am lacking vitamin D. I take care of my precious but invalid wife and do not get much time outdoors to get that sunny D! We used to go to the beach at least once a month. Sounds like good therapy!

 

I can understand laying the groundwork for your atonement view but if you are waiting for others to provide you a consensus before moving on, the wait will be interminable. Eventually, you should move on and just make your case. My intention is to "cross-examine" your position to make sure I understand it.

 

JonC said:
If you are now saying that you agree with me that only God defines what is just then I accept your apology.

My Response:
I said that from the very post that you are arguing about. Good grief. I'm not apologizing for anything, if anything you should apologize to me for the false accusations that you just disproved yourself. I did not ascribe to you a belief you did not hold.

JonC said:
I had repeatedly claimed that what is just is defined by God.

My Response:
Claiming something is one thing, but your theology shows otherwise.

JonC said:
We cannot dictate to other people what that other person believes. I have been open and honest about my view. For someone to state I believe something other than I have claimed is offensive.

My Response:
I'm going by what you have said. I'm not dictating anything. If you are offended, I'm not sure what I can do for you. You talk about the justice of God being God's but then refuse to see it as it is laid out in Scripture. Justice is that sin must be punished. Period. That is clear throughout Scripture.

You talk about propitiation and atonement but then say that doesn't go far enough? How do you define those words Jon? What do they actually mean?

This is where the gymnastics come in. You see Penal Substitution but you find ways to "reason" out of it.

 

This is not about me. I am interested to hear from you and the position to which you ascribe.

 

I understand. Still, you have a view on the Atonement, correct? While your view may have different aspects it still is a view distinct from the one I hold to.