|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: The Emerging Church-Good or Bad? - 4/4/2008 5:23:54 PM
|
|
|
mushhead
Posts: 353
Joined: 5/29/2005
From: Kearns
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: facedown
indeed, much can be argued from early church writings, including scripture. i assume you don't believe the church fathers to be full of false teachings? and you have not proven that penal substitution was embraced in that particular period of time. as to your point 2, they may not; however, and again, you cannot take the notion of substitution and believe that penal automatically pops up behind it.
facedown,
Yes, much can be learned from early church writings, but they are not scripture. Just as with everything else, patristic writings must be tested against Scripture.
I do not believe all the patristic writings are false teachings, but some are. Just how many? I don't know. But, as I said in my previous post, the fact that some are false demonstrates that finding something in early church writings doesn't mean that it is Biblical.
I proved that it is not a new doctrine that was invented in the age of modernity. To add to the evidence that I presented, you can read the writings of Augustine (especially his debate with Pelagius) and the semi-pelgianism belief system that developed later.
quote:
ORIGINAL: facedown,
isaiah53:4-6 is most often the "proof-text" for penal substitution. but lets look a little closer. what we see just prior is the servant himself will be the one who leads god's people back from exile. the sevant of god who is coming to bring restoration and salvation takes teh 'kholiy' and 'makobah' (infirmities and sorrows) upon himself. these wounds and sufferings are to be healed and reconcilled, and it is the servant of god who takes these upon himself, it is he who restores saves, and brings peace.
how has this happened? matthew says that this verse is fulfileld in jesus' healing of the sick who were brought to him, and in his defeat of demonic powers:
I am not quite sure how you get that the Messiah is the one who "leads god's people back from exile" from Isaiah 53:1-3 (the verses just prior). I will save you the work of citing the passage by posting them below; will you demonstrate how these verses lead you to that conclusion?
quote:
Who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.
3 He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.
Like one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not. (Isaiah 53:1-3)
As I demonstrated in my last post from Isaiah and 1Peter, the healing of our wounds takes place when the Messiah suffers in our place for our transgressions. The tying together of our transgressions and our healing, reveals that our healing is a removal of sin. In any case, these passages (and many, many others - some of which I have cited in this thread) cannot be ignored. Their meaning is beyond misunderstanding. Therefore, any interpretation has to take them into account. Your interpretation ignores the plain meaning of this unambiguous message.
So, does this mean that only those people who experience physical healing are redeemed? Does it mean that anyone that dies of their infirmity is not redeemed? I guess I am asking for you to demonstrate how your interpretation works for people now, and how it is consistant with the revelation found in the rest of Scripture? Where does sin fit into this redemption? So, how does this redemption solve our sin problem?
quote:
ORIGINAL: facedown
jesus sees everything that is wrong and broken about humanity and turns it back to god in restoration. jesus takes infirmity into his own person, and even subjection to death (phil 2:6-11). paul makes a direct connection between this servanthood, subjection to death, and vinidcation, which is the key to understanding isaiah 53. and this brings about healing to humanity. he drives out the enemy and makes known his rule with the kingdom of god.
Your almost there, but your infirmity substitutionary atonement theory falls short in at least one respect: you refuse to use the word "sin." When you say Jesus sees "everything wrong and broken about humanity" you fail to understand - or refuse to acknowledge - that "everyting wrong and broken about humanity" results from our rebellion (sin! sin! sin!) against God. Apparently you do understand - or at least you are willing to acknowledge - that Jesus takes something into Himself, but you are unable - or unwilling - to bring yourself to acknowledge that the "something," is our sin.
I do have one question about your version of atonement: what does Jesus' subjection to death accomplish?
To understanding Isaiah 53 we cannot follow your lead and ignore the following verse and others in the passage that say the same thing. Rather we must take into account this very clear and unmistakeable statement:
quote:
But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities; (Isaiah 53:5a)
God tells us through Isaiah that Jesus did suffer for our sins. He reveals the same thing in the following verse from the Paul's second epistle to the Corinthians:
quote:
God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
(2Corinthians 5:21)
I also refer you back to Paul's description of the content of the gospel found in 1Corinthians 15:1-3 which says that Jesus died for our sins. I also remind you of Paul's statement earlier in first Corinthians where Paul said that he preaches the cross which is foolishness to those who are perishing (not a judgment about your position, but a retelling of God's own warning to anyone that rejects this great sacrifice made on our behalf).
So, your contention that neither Isaiah nor Paul teach "penal substitutionary atonement" is demonstrably false. In fact, the 2Corinthians 5:21 passage alone (cited above) is so clear that it is impossible for anyone that seeks to allow God to tell them what to believe, rather than trying to impose their own beliefs on God, cannot possibly come to any other conclusion.
EDITED TO ADD: You asked what happens to those that reject Jesus' message: Jesus said in John 3:19 that whoever does not believe will remain under condemnation for their sins against God (notice that they are already under condemnation. This agrees with the full counsel of God's word that reveals humanity is presently under condemnation - or in other words, "at enmity with God" - and the purpose of Jesus' sacrifice is to bring people from death into life; John 5:24). Also, in Mark 9:43-48 Jesus recites Isaish 66:22-24 to tell us that the condemnation for sin is an eternity in hell.
quote:
Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. (John 3:18)
As the new heavens and the new earth that I make will endure before me,” declares the LORD, “so will your name and descendants endure. 23 From one New Moon to another and from one Sabbath to another, all mankind will come and bow down before me,” says the LORD. 24 “And they will go out and look upon the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; their worm will not die, nor will their fire be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind.” (Is. 66:22-24)
If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out. 45 And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. 47 And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, 48 where ”‘their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.’ (Mark 9:43-48)
< Message edited by mushhead -- 4/5/2008 5:45:29 PM >
_____________________________
MUSHHEAD
Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces. Matt. 7:6
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Emerging Church-Good or Bad? - 4/4/2008 7:47:06 PM
|
|
|
mushhead
Posts: 353
Joined: 5/29/2005
From: Kearns
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: facedown
mushead
quote:
ORIGINAL: mushhead
So, it doesn't matter what the EOC or anyone else teaches; for anyone that rejects penal substitutionary atonement is rejecting God's message.
rejecting god's message....wow, what a bold statement. what do you believe the consequence of this "rejection" is?
regarding post 189:
this gift of life we have in god is through participation, partaking, feasting, and finding our being in Christ (literally) and Christ being in us (literally). i shared quite a few passages on this point in the eucharist thread just recently. and again, the point of this previous discussion with VCO wasn't about the eucharist, nor John 6, but about an earlier encounter Jesus had - was he actually speaking to the folks he was speaking to, or not?
quote:
It is hard to imagine that a God who sacrificed His own Son to provide redemption is going to condemn someone on a technicality . how do you reconcile this statement with the previous one quoted?
facedown,
You might have been talking about an earlier encounter Jesus had, but in post #185 you asked VCO about Jesus' address in John chapter six where He talked about eating his flesh. That is the question that I responded to.
As for how I can reconcile my belief that God isn't going to condemn people on a technicality with the clear teaching of Scripture that God will condemn anyone that rejects Jesus' message: let me just say that hearing the message and then rejecting it does not qualify as a technicality. Instead it reflects open hostility toward God. And yes, even someone that dedicates his or her life to following God can be guilty of open hostility toward God...remember the pharisees.
When I referred to a "technicality" I was talking about people who accept Jesus' words; believe that He payed the penalty for their sins; believe that without Jesus and apart from that sacrifice they cannot be redeemed; but who believe that John chapter six reveals that we express that faith and partake in God's grace through the eucharist. I was not in any way referring to people who, after hearing the message of the gospel, tell God that they don't believe Him that His only begotten Son was sacrificed to pay the penalty for their sins (primarily because they reject the suggestion that any such sacrifice is necessary).
WOULD IT NOT BE BETTER TO SPIT IN GOD'S FACE, THAN TO CALL GOD A LIAR AND BE REPULSED BY THE VERY COSTLY AND PAINFUL SACRIFICE OF HIS SON.
< Message edited by mushhead -- 4/5/2008 5:59:49 PM >
_____________________________
MUSHHEAD
Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces. Matt. 7:6
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Emerging Church-Good or Bad? - 4/6/2008 12:09:44 AM
|
|
|
VCO
Posts: 98
Joined: 1/13/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: facedown
. . . never heard of hunt, but after looking at his website, he seems to suggest that he's a reconstructionist, and that "church history" from the time st john penned "amen" to some unknown recent period in time, the "church" is not what it was, not to be trusted, and indeed "heretical".
U&U
That is very strange, as nearly everyone from a Baptist, Evangelical, or I.F.C.A. background has heard of Dave Hunt, even though he has an Arminian background. He has written 30 books, but most associate him with his book "The Seduction of Christianity" and it's sequal "Beyond the Seduction of Christianity". Dave Hunt was a featured speaker on the John Ankerberg Show more than once, http://www.ankerberg.org/ , and was even a quest speaker once at Dr. John MacArthur's Grace Community Church. AND NO, I do not agree with everything he teaches, but he is far from a heretic, instead, in the two books above he clearly points out Herecies that have crept into the Church, including several Big Name preachers that teach that we are "little gods". Like I heard Dave Hunt say in one of his lecture Videos, "If a witch doctor in war paint and feathers came into your Church chanting and dancing, intent on taking over the pulpit, I dare say before he could get half ways to the pulpit, two men from your congregation would grab him by each arm and toss him out the front door. But I fear if the same man came in possing as a famous theologian, wearing a suite and tie, toting a big Bible, and quoting scripture, you would listen to his herecies all day long."
What denominational background do you hale from by the way?
< Message edited by VCO -- 4/6/2008 2:13:45 AM >
_____________________________
Titus 2:13
VCO
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Emerging Church-Good or Bad? - 4/6/2008 3:02:00 AM
|
|
|
VCO
Posts: 98
Joined: 1/13/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: facedown
vco
many words have baggage. as i'm sure you know "holistic" isn't a "new age" word, it denotes something as a whole. but for you, you hear something else. . . .
U&U
Now I challenge you to do your own GOOGLE searches, and see how many mainline Christian sites use the terms "holistic", "holistic understanding", or "holistic religion". I just did, and ingnoring that term's usage in association with medicine, looking only at that term's usage in association with religious beliefs, it is almost exclusively used by the New Age, and other Cults. Even ISLAM uses it: "The Islamist view regards Islam as a holistic religion, embracing all aspects of life, public and private." BUT ALMOST NO VALID MAINLINE CHRISTIAN SITE USES IT. In all fairness, I did find ONE Catholic Chaplain's article using the word "holistic". BUT I am confident that I am correct in stating that in association with religious beliefs, "holistic understanding" is as I said, almost EXCLUSIVELY a New Age and other Cults' term.
_____________________________
Titus 2:13
VCO
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Emerging Church-Good or Bad? - 4/6/2008 2:13:45 PM
|
|
|
VCO
Posts: 98
Joined: 1/13/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: facedown
. . . your "biblical answer to question 1 is well and good; however, it isn't very holistic, . . .
U&U
Re-reading your post, I have to think you are saying that the Biblical answers that I posted were "narrow minded". If that is what you meant, then AMEM, PRAISE THE LORD, you are right! I am very narrow minded, BECAUSE I follow the most "Narrow Minded" man that ever lived:
John 14:6-11 (HCSB)
6 Jesus told him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
7 “If you know Me, you will also know My Father. From now on you do know Him and have seen Him.”
8 “Lord,” said Philip, “show us the Father, and that’s enough for us.”
9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been among you all this time without your knowing Me, Philip? The one who has seen Me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?
10 Don’t you believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me? The words I speak to you I do not speak on My own. The Father who lives in Me does His works.
11 Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me. Otherwise, believe because of the works themselves.
Matthew 7:13-14 (NASB)
13 "Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it.
14 "For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.
Matthew 7:21-23 (NIV)
21 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?'
23 Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
Acts 4:12 (NIV)
12 Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."
John 3:3 (NIV)
3 In reply Jesus declared, "I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again."
Can one be born again without repenting of a sinful lifestyle?
Luke 13:3 (ISV)
3 Absolutely not, I tell you! But if you don't repent, then you, too, will all die.
Colossians 2:6 (NIV)
6 So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live in Him,
< Message edited by VCO -- 4/6/2008 6:47:03 PM >
_____________________________
Titus 2:13
VCO
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Emerging Church-Good or Bad? - 4/6/2008 9:15:05 PM
|
|
|
facedown
Posts: 1022
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: the urban desert
Status: offline
|
fyi
i'll be out of town for about a week, possibly two. so don't think that a lack of response is because i'm ignoring you all, or disengaging from the discussion.
if i can find time or an internet cafe or something, i'll see you before then.
pax
_____________________________
-| those who say, don't know. those who know, don't say |-
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Emerging Church-Good or Bad? - 4/22/2008 7:15:12 AM
|
|
|
facedown
Posts: 1022
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: the urban desert
Status: offline
|
mushead
you're not sure how isaiah speaks of the servant of god coming to bring restoration, leading his people out of exile? here, let me quote a few excerpts:
"The ransomed of the LORD will return" (isaiah 51:11, and compare with psalm 126).
"The cowering prisoners will soon be set free" (isaiah 51:14)
and nearly all of isaiah 52 hearkens of our being likened to captives
and do not forget what the mighty arm of the lord signifies (isaiah 53:1).
let's look a little closer at this whole section.
52:13 to the end of 52, the speaker is god. the beginning of 53 to around 53:9, the gentile kings of nations are speaking. and somewhere in here, we see things like 52:13 and 53:11 the passage speak of "my (god's) servant", while the other passages speak of "our transgressions", i.e. those committed by the gentile nations against god's servant: gods people, and in this particular case, israel.
but it should be noted, that i'm not arguing a demand for this to be so (suffering servant has no messianic understandings).
+
our healing is a removal of sin? could be an interesting statement to unpack, inlight of the gospels. not saying i disagree with you, but that i doubt many would agree based on all the examples of folks finding themselves healed.
how does it work for people now (my interpretation)? same as it always has, i suppose. i've not once suggested that only those "healed" are those "redeemed", and it was just you who pointed out in the paragraph above that healing is a removal of sin. many folks are redeemed and physically unhealed, it seems.
"...god tells us through isaiah that jesus..."
no, that's not quite right my friend. we understand isiaiah, as christians, to be speaking of the pure one who suffered for us, who is redeeming us, (etc). but isiaiah never says "jesus"
i'm sorry, where exactly did isaiah argue a "penal substitution"? can you lay that out again?
and, what do you make of this:
quote:
When Jesus came into Peter's house, he saw Peter's mother-in-law lying in bed with a fever. He touched her hand and the fever left her, and she got up and began to wait on him. When evening came, many who were demon-possessed were brought to him, and he drove out the spirits with a word and healed all the sick. This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet Isaiah:
"He took up our infirmities
and carried our diseases."
it's also ineresting that you speak of things such as "technicalitity". and i'm trying to understand you correctly, are you suggesting that one will be condemend by god, for rejecting (after hearing) the "message"? that they are alike the pharisees, those who beat their chests maybe, those who jesus said "you spoke in the streets about me, but begone, i know you not"?
i'm trying to read "penal substitution" in the above.
all i have time for now, gotta run.
pax
_____________________________
-| those who say, don't know. those who know, don't say |-
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
