Appeasement of a Monster God?

[ProDeo]

It would be contrary to the Christian view of the trinity if wrath was directed toward one member of the trinity by another.

And if it were true it likely would make me an instant Universalist, against all odds.

Because it sounds like God takes responsibility for His decision to equip us with free will while He knew on beforehand that sin sooner or later would rear its ugly head. Hence the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, His solution before creating us. It's almost blasphemy to reason this way.

@Johann

 

[civic]

It would be contrary to the Christian view of the trinity if wrath was directed toward one member of the trinity by another.

Yep

 

[Johann]

And if it were true it likely would make me an instant Universalist, against all odds.

Because it sounds like God takes responsibility for His decision to equip us with free will while He knew on beforehand that sin sooner or later would rear its ugly head. Hence the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, His solution before creating us. It's almost blasphemy to reason this way.

Glad to see you tagged me--interesting that you're implying I'm promoting blasphemy.








The Nature of God’s Wrath:
God’s wrath is not a loss of control or a division within the Trinity. Instead, it is God’s just response to sin. In Christ, God’s justice and mercy meet.

Romans 5:8–9 (NASB):
"But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him."

The wrath is directed at sin itself, and Christ willingly bore that wrath in our place.

5. Is This Blasphemous Reasoning?
It would only be blasphemy if it implied that God the Father acted against God the Son in a way that was contrary to the divine nature or purpose. However, Scripture clearly teaches that the Father, Son, and Spirit were in perfect agreement regarding the plan of salvation.

Philippians 2:8 (NASB):
"Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross."

The Son’s obedience to the Father’s redemptive plan shows concurrence, not conflict.

6. My Thoughts--
Your concern about blasphemy seems to stem from the idea that God’s wrath on Christ implies a conflict within the Trinity, but Scripture consistently portrays the atonement as an act of unified, willing sacrifice. The Trinitarian relationship is not disrupted; rather, the atonement reveals the depth of God’s love and justice.

My advice to you is to not tag me again @ProDeo since you and I have nothing in common.

(ti emoi kai soi)? Nada.

J.

 

[TomL]

Yep

That's the problem with the current PSA theory of atonement.

 

[Dizerner]

That's the problem with the current PSA theory of atonement.

There is zero problem with the Biblical atonement that Jesus stood in our place and took our punishment.

The objections are all completely invalid and frankly, dumb.

 

[TomL]

And if it were true it likely would make me an instant Universalist, against all odds.

Because it sounds like God takes responsibility for His decision to equip us with free will while He knew on beforehand that sin sooner or later would rear its ugly head. Hence the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, His solution before creating us. It's almost blasphemy to reason this way.

@Johann

Well, glad you are not a universalist

 

[TomL]

There is zero problem with the Biblical atonement that Jesus stood in our place and took our punishment.

The objections are all completely invalid and frankly, dumb.

What is dumb is the idea God poured out his wrath on God and forsook him. Christ, God the son, becoming an anathema to God the Father.

ideas expressed here

And God Cursed Him

Rather we see

2 Corinthians 5:19 (NASB95) — 19 namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.