If Jesus' sacrifice did not satisfy the wrath of God, and was not the punishment for sin, then how can any Christian have assurance of salvation or total freedom from hell? What if Christ's sacrifice missed a spot? If I were to adopt you're way of thinking, I could make an easy argument for the loss of salvation, possibly a need for some sort of purgatory, but ultimately a works salvation. Are you saying that Christ's sacrifice was insufficient for the salvation of God's chosen people?
The atonement is a perfect substitute for the damnation of our entire race, so that if we turn from sin God will turn from His wrath without dishonoring his law. What Jesus did He did for all, but only those who repent are saved from God's wrath. We are saved from God's wrath at conversion, not at Calvary.
@bibletheology Jesus' sacrifice had to be enough to satisfy God's wrath; He is the Son of God, who is perfect and without blemish. Only a sacrifice like Christ could satisfy God's wrath since no other sacrifice could have been good enough. It is totally insulting to God to say that Christ's sacrifice wasn't sufficient enough. The Bible always points to Christ in the New Testament as the way to salvation, and why God's wrath has been excused from believers. Because He sees Christ in believers
@EvangelistChristian The atonement of Christ was sufficient enough to enable God to turn away from His wrath without dishonoring or weakening His law. It is totally insultint to God to say that Christ's sacrifice wasn't sufficient enough to enable Him to righteously set aside His wrath.
@bibletheology I said that Christ's death WAS sufficient enough for God to pardon His wrath from believers, so I don't know why you are accusing me of saying it wasn't sufficient...And seeing your comment from before, Jesus only died for those who the Lord knew He would save; not the entire world. Otherwise, wouldn't eveyone be going to heaven? The Bible teaches that Christ's death had limited atonement. Only God's elect people had Christ die for them.
I adhere to the ransom/Christus Victor view of the atonement - not the moral government theory - but I support you totally in your fight against penal substitution and other satisfaction views.
Since the Law was fulfilled by Christ & the Law was spiritually nailed to the cross... all of us who are born since the destruction of Old Covenant Israel in AD70 (the Temple destroyed as Christ predicted) are now in the New Covenant Age where evil exists, but it is not counted against us as "sin"!
This is God's plan hidden throughout the ages.... Time will show this to be true, yet most people will never see it because they are blinded by religion & don't truly seek God with all their heart.
I think what they mean is that God's wrath is satisfied toward the "whosoever believes in him" because Jesus was a substitute in their place. If one doesn't see themselves crucified with Christ, then they are under God's wrath. If one is crucified with Christ then our sins were atoned for at the alter of the Cross.
But Jesus died for everyone and everyone is under God's wrath until they believe. Therefore God's wrath was not satisfied at the atonement. God does not turn from His wrath until sinners are converted.
It was for those who died as prisoners of hope before the birth of Jesus. The more I think about it Jesus took God's ultimate wrath. The Father forsook the Son..separated himself from him when he "became sin"(2Cor 5.21). So now we either receive grace "or" we receive the wages of sin..death. Then it would seem that his wrath was satisfied because grace is offered. Just a thought..i haven't studied this thought fully. Thanks for th reply!
Jesse: You know Luke 17:3-4? It says, "IF your brother repents, forgive him". It seems that there's a precondition. That you don't have to forgive until the person who sinned against you repents. I'd be interested in hearing what you have to say about that.
Great men throughout history have taught a great atonement view. It is interesting that it was the governmental atonement view that was taught throughout the Great Awakenings.
What "Law" is Jesse speaking of when he talks of "God's Law"?
rkg62976 2 years ago
If Jesus' sacrifice did not satisfy the wrath of God, and was not the punishment for sin, then how can any Christian have assurance of salvation or total freedom from hell? What if Christ's sacrifice missed a spot? If I were to adopt you're way of thinking, I could make an easy argument for the loss of salvation, possibly a need for some sort of purgatory, but ultimately a works salvation. Are you saying that Christ's sacrifice was insufficient for the salvation of God's chosen people?
AquaFiji7 2 years ago
The atonement is a perfect substitute for the damnation of our entire race, so that if we turn from sin God will turn from His wrath without dishonoring his law. What Jesus did He did for all, but only those who repent are saved from God's wrath. We are saved from God's wrath at conversion, not at Calvary.
bibletheology 2 years ago
@bibletheology Jesus' sacrifice had to be enough to satisfy God's wrath; He is the Son of God, who is perfect and without blemish. Only a sacrifice like Christ could satisfy God's wrath since no other sacrifice could have been good enough. It is totally insulting to God to say that Christ's sacrifice wasn't sufficient enough. The Bible always points to Christ in the New Testament as the way to salvation, and why God's wrath has been excused from believers. Because He sees Christ in believers
EvangelistChristian 1 year ago
@EvangelistChristian The atonement of Christ was sufficient enough to enable God to turn away from His wrath without dishonoring or weakening His law. It is totally insultint to God to say that Christ's sacrifice wasn't sufficient enough to enable Him to righteously set aside His wrath.
bibletheology 1 year ago
@bibletheology I said that Christ's death WAS sufficient enough for God to pardon His wrath from believers, so I don't know why you are accusing me of saying it wasn't sufficient...And seeing your comment from before, Jesus only died for those who the Lord knew He would save; not the entire world. Otherwise, wouldn't eveyone be going to heaven? The Bible teaches that Christ's death had limited atonement. Only God's elect people had Christ die for them.
EvangelistChristian 1 year ago
I adhere to the ransom/Christus Victor view of the atonement - not the moral government theory - but I support you totally in your fight against penal substitution and other satisfaction views.
Great videos. :)
ElasticGiraffe 2 years ago
Daniel 9:24
Colossians 1:19-20
Romans 5:10
The wrath of God was upon the Jews who were under Law... the Gentiles were never under Law and not in covenant with God.
Why was God so wrathful.... because His Laws were being broken.
Consider... To be guilty of breaking a Law, doesn't one need to be subject to that Law in the first place?
Jesus atoned for those under the Law as well as reconciled us without the Law.
And as Daniel 9 states... He would put an end to sin by fulfilling the Law. :)
ChristianNewsWatch 2 years ago
Since the Law was fulfilled by Christ & the Law was spiritually nailed to the cross... all of us who are born since the destruction of Old Covenant Israel in AD70 (the Temple destroyed as Christ predicted) are now in the New Covenant Age where evil exists, but it is not counted against us as "sin"!
This is God's plan hidden throughout the ages.... Time will show this to be true, yet most people will never see it because they are blinded by religion & don't truly seek God with all their heart.
ChristianNewsWatch 2 years ago
I think what they mean is that God's wrath is satisfied toward the "whosoever believes in him" because Jesus was a substitute in their place. If one doesn't see themselves crucified with Christ, then they are under God's wrath. If one is crucified with Christ then our sins were atoned for at the alter of the Cross.
ixthustruth 2 years ago
But Jesus died for everyone and everyone is under God's wrath until they believe. Therefore God's wrath was not satisfied at the atonement. God does not turn from His wrath until sinners are converted.
bibletheology 2 years ago
It was for those who died as prisoners of hope before the birth of Jesus. The more I think about it Jesus took God's ultimate wrath. The Father forsook the Son..separated himself from him when he "became sin"(2Cor 5.21). So now we either receive grace "or" we receive the wages of sin..death. Then it would seem that his wrath was satisfied because grace is offered. Just a thought..i haven't studied this thought fully. Thanks for th reply!
ixthustruth 2 years ago
Very good and detailed message. Keep bringing truth.
lildog73 2 years ago
Jesse: You know Luke 17:3-4? It says, "IF your brother repents, forgive him". It seems that there's a precondition. That you don't have to forgive until the person who sinned against you repents. I'd be interested in hearing what you have to say about that.
FireThunderTV 2 years ago
Actually there's no such thing as 'Hell' in the Bible.
It's hades, geenna, & sheol.
However, there is a lake of fire.
NobodySpecial85 2 years ago
God bless you Jesse. The governmental view epitomies justice and grace far better than popular opinion and tradition. Sound and biblical teaching.
AaronM144000 2 years ago
Yes the purpose of penalty (public justice) is satisfied, and the penalty itself can be remitted (mercy).
RefutingCalvinism 2 years ago
Great men throughout history have taught a great atonement view. It is interesting that it was the governmental atonement view that was taught throughout the Great Awakenings.
OpenAirOutreach 2 years ago