The 10 most Commonly referred to points against PSA

[Johann]

How is that for dealing with the Greek OT?

Not bad-accept for the fact I am not a KJV-"onlyism"

Josephus also used other Greek translations than the LXX, most notably the proto-Lucian texts [WTOT:60, n.38].

He also praises the pagan king, who received the Greek translation of the Pentateuch (Ant 1.10-13):

'I found, therefore, that the second of the Ptolemies was a king who was extraordinarily diligent in what concerned learning and the collection of books; that he was also peculiarly ambitious to procure a translation of our law, and of the constitution of our government therein contained, into the Greek tongue. (11) Now Eleazar, the high priest, one not inferior to any other of that dignity among us, did not envy the forenamed king the participation of that advantage, which otherwise he would for certain have denied him, but that he knew the custom of our nation was, to hinder nothing of what we esteemed ourselves from being communicated to others. (12) Accordingly, I thought it became me both to imitate the generosity of our high priest, and to suppose there might even now be many lovers of learning like the king; for he did not obtain all our writings at that time; but those who were sent to Alexandria as interpreters, gave him only the books of the law, (13) while there were a vast number of other matters in our sacred books.'

And,

"'The fact that Josephus was himself writing in Greek would make it seem likely that his chief textual source was the LXX, especially since he cited it as a precedent for presenting the history of the Jews to a non-Jewish audience (Ant 1. Proem 3 §10-12) and since he devoted so much space paraphrasing the account of the translation given in Let. Aris. (Ant 12.2.1-15 §11-118), hardly what one would expect in a work which is essentially a political and military rather than a cultural and religious history of the Jews.

And yet, the very fact that he paraphrased the Bible in Greek would seem to indicate that he hoped to improve on that rendering, since there would hardly be much point otherwise in a new version. Hence it is not surprising that where the style of the LXX is more polished, as in the Additions to Esther or in 1 Esdras, he adheres more closely to its text. And yet, to have ignored the LXX, in view of the tremendous regard in which that version was held, would have been looked upon as an attempt to hide something.

Nevertheless, even when Josephus agrees with the LXX, this is not necessarily an indication that he had the LXX text before him, since he may have incorporated an exegetical tradition which had been known earlier to the translators of the LXX. Finally, the biblical texts found at Qumran indicate that the differences between the Hebrew and the Greek texts were not so great as had been previously thought.'

4. Writers of the Pseudepigraphical and Apocryphal works. Here we have a vast amount of literature, from 300 bc to 300 ad, from Palestine and beyond, written in Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic (or 'other'!), by all types and stripes of theological persuasion. We can scarcely even sample this, but let's look at some of it.

As would be expected, the Greek-language and/or Egpytian-provenanced pieces demonstrate high LXX usage, but such usage is NOT confined to these texts. Below is a list of partial citations/allusions in the Pseudepigrapha to passages in the LXX. (The Apocrypha, of course, is PART of the LXX.)

1.1 Chron 29.2 in Joseph and Asenath 2c

2.1 Sam 13.17 in Joseph and Asenath 24z

3.2 Sam 4.6 in Joseph and Asenath 10g

4.Dan 4.13 in Joseph and Asenath 10e

5.Dan 4.33a-34 in Joseph and Asenath 10b

6.Dan 4.33a-b in Joseph and Asenath 10h2

7.Dan 4.34 in Joseph and Asenath 12a

8.Dan 7.15 in Joseph and Asenath 12y

9.Deut 32.21 in 3 (Greek Apoc) of Baruch (Gk) 16.3

10.Deut 32.30 in Apocalypse of Daniel 4.14

11.Esther 3.17 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 2.2

12.Ex 12.40 in Demetrius Frag 2.16,18

13.Ex 13.9 in Aristobulus Frag 2.8

14.Ex 17.16 in Joseph and Asenath 8d2

15.Ex 2.15-18 in Artapanus Frag 3.27.19

16.Ex 20.11 in Aristobulus Frag 5.12

17.Ex 22.27 in Joseph and Asenath 10v

18.Ex 3.20 in Aristobulus Frag 2.8

19.Ex 9.3 in Aristobulus Frag 2.8

20.Gen 1.2 in Joseph and Asenath 12d, 12e

21.Gen 1.3-24 in Aristobulus Frag 4.3

22.Gen 1.6 in Joseph and Asenath 12h

23.Gen 10.1 in Apocalypse of Adam 4.9

24.Gen 10.1f in Joseph and Asenath 2q

25.Gen 14.19 in Joseph and Asenath 8f

26.Gen 2.8 in Testament of Abraham A 11.1

27.Gen 22.17 in Greek Apoc. of Ezra 3.10

28.Gen 25.1-4 in Demetrius Frag 3.1

29.Gen 3.23 in Joseph and Asenath 16.n

30.Gen 30.37 in Greek Apoc. of Ezra 1.3

31.Gen 39.19 in Joseph and Asenath 23r

32.Gen 42.19 in Joseph and Asenath 26e

33.Gen 42.33 in Joseph and Asenath 26e

34.Gen 44.7 in Joseph and Asenath 23u

35.Gen 46.27 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 12.64

36.Gen 49.24 in Joseph and Asenath 8w

37.Gen 5.4 in Apocalypse of Adam 1.1

38.Gen 50.22b-26 in Joseph and Asenath 29i

39.I Kings 4.29-34 in Testament of Solomon 3.5

40.Is 1.13 in Joseph and Asenath 14c

41.Is 14.12 in Greek Apoc. of Ezra 4.28

42.Is 26.19 in Apocryphon of Ezekiel Frag 1

43.Is 40.12 in Greek Apoc. of Ezra 7.5

44.Is 47.8 in Joseph and Asenath 11k2

45.Is 52.13 in Ascension of Isaiah 4.21

46.Is 58.11 in Joseph and Asenath 24x

47.Is 66.1 in Joseph and Asenath 22r

48.Is 8.20 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 12.69

49.Is 9.5 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 12.10

50.Jer 38 in Joseph and Asenath 12f

51.Job 38.38 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 4.16

52.Job 9.18 in Joseph and Asenath 12x

53.Jonah 1.17 in Testament of Zebulun 4.4

54.Judges 7.16 in Joseph and Asenath 24z

55.Mal 1.1 in Lives of the Prophets 16.2

56.Micah 1.8 in 2 (Syriac) Apocalypse of Baruch 10.8

57.Numbers 12.8 in Greek Apoc. of Ezra 6.6

58.Numbers 16.48 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 6.6

59.Prov 11.31 in Apocalypse of Daniel 11.11

60.Prov 24.21 in Syriac Menander 9

61.Prov 8.27 in 2 (Slavonic Apocalypse) of Enoch 25.4

62.Ps 100.3 in Odes of Solomon 7.12

63.Ps 102.1 in i 12y

64.Ps 103.2 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 3.3; 12.16

65.Ps 103.24 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 4.7

66.Ps 103.25 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 12.24

67.Ps 103.25-26 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 3.11

68.Ps 104.21 in 2 (Slavonic Apocalypse) of Enoch 104.21

69.Ps 106.34 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 12.61

70.Ps 113.12 in Joseph and Asenath 2f

71.Ps 120.8 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 13.12

72.Ps 129.3f in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 11.11

73.Ps 143.4 in i 12y

74.Ps 144.18 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 6.3

75.Ps 144.3 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 4.25

76.Ps 146.4 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 4.19

77.Ps 146.5 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 4.1

78.Ps 151 in LIBER ANTIQUITATUM BIBLICARUM 62.5

79.Ps 18.2 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 4.5

80.Ps 20.4 in Odes of Solomon 9.8

81.Ps 36.4 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 13.9

82.Ps 41.2 in History of Joseph C Verso 6

83.Ps 50.21 in Apocalypse of Daniel 14.12

84.Ps 50.3 in Odes of Solomon 7.10

85.Ps 61.3 in Joseph and Asenath 12y

86.Ps 67.18 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 4.15

87.Ps 73.15 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 12.78

88.Ps 77.24 in Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers 12.75

89.Ps 88.10 in Joseph and Asenath 12x

90.Ps 9.37 in Joseph and Asenath 19d

91.Ps 95.11 in Joseph and Asenath 8f2

92.Zech 5.1-3 in Lives of the Prophets 3.5

93.Zech 13.6 in Ladder of Jacob 7.30

94.Zech 2.15 in Joseph and Asenath 15l

 

[Johann]

No thanks I have done my own homework and self study. I can think and discern just fine without reading a biased doctrinal source. PSA is unbiblical with the Father punishing the Son, pouring His wrath on His own Beloved Son, then finally KILLING His own Son.

That is straight out Paganism.

No Thank you !

hope this helps !!!

Would appear you go against the biblical narrative.

 

[civic]

Would appear you go against the biblical narrative.

You are Projecting.

Just the opposite. See below as you are going against Scripture, not me.

I have over a dozen passages below that prove I'm correct and back up my claims are biblical.


Who was responsible for putting Jesus to death, was it God or man?

Matthew 16:21-From that time on Jesus began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests, and scribes, and that He must be killed and on the third day be raised to life

Matthew 17:23- They will kill Him, and on the third day He will be raised to life." And the disciples were deeply grieved.

Matthew 20:18-19 -“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 and will deliver Him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and crucified.

Matthew 26:66- What do you think?” “He is worthy of death,” they answered.

Matthew 27:1- When the morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death:

Matthew 27:35- When they had crucified Him, they divided up His garments by casting lots.

Mark 8:31- And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.

Mark 10:33- “We are going up to Jerusalem,” he said, “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 and will hand him over to the Gentiles,

Mark 14:64- Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.

Mark 15:24- And they crucified Him. They also divided His garments by casting lots to decide what each of them would take

John 19:7- We have a law," answered the Jews, "and according to that law He must die, because He declared Himself to be the Son of God."

Acts 2:23 This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross

Acts 4:10,11 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole…

Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

Acts 7:52 Was there ever a prophet your ancestors did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him

Acts 13:27 For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him

1 Corinthians 2:8- None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory


conclusion: The Father killing the Son is blasphemy, anti biblical, anti- God .anti- Christ, anti- Chrriatian. Its 100% paganism.

hope this helps !!!

 

[Johann]

You are Projecting.

Just the opposite. See below as you are going against Scripture, not me.

I have a dozen passages below that prove I'm correct and back up my claims are biblical.


Who was responsible for putting Jesus to death, was it God or man?

Matthew 16:21-From that time on Jesus began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests, and scribes, and that He must be killed and on the third day be raised to life

Matthew 17:23- They will kill Him, and on the third day He will be raised to life." And the disciples were deeply grieved.

Matthew 20:18-19 -“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 and will deliver Him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and crucified.

Matthew 27:1- When the morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death:

Matthew 27:35- When they had crucified Him, they divided up His garments by casting lots.

Mark 10:33- “We are going up to Jerusalem,” he said, “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 and will hand him over to the Gentiles,

Mark 15:24- And they crucified Him. They also divided His garments by casting lots to decide what each of them would take

Acts 2:23 This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross

Acts 4:10,11 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole…

Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

Acts 7:52 Was there ever a prophet your ancestors did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him

Acts 13:27 For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him

1 Corinthians 2:8- None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory


conclusion: The Father killing the Son is blasphemy, anti biblical, anti- God .anti- Christ, anti- Chrriatian. Its 100% paganism.

hope this helps !!!

Nowhere did I even hinted the God killed His own Son and true proponents of PSA don't advocate this.
You know it-and I know it.
Shalom.

 

[civic]

Nowhere did I even hinted the God killed His own Son and true proponents of PSA don't advocate this.
You know it-and I know it.
Shalom.

You really don't know what Calvinists teach and what they believe. I do since I was one for over 40 years and have most of their books on calvinism and theology. I know what they teach and believe. I don't need google to find out. I know from studying and reading their works in my library.

So once again you are 100 % wrong.

Calvinists teach the Father KILLED the Son so I will quote a few famous ones for you proving what Calvinists actually believe and teach.

MacArthur in the gospel according to God says :

We must remember that sin did not kill Jesus; God did. The suffering servants death was nothing less than a punishment administered by God for the sins committed by others.

Piper says in the passion of the Christ :

The ultimate question to who killed Jesus is God did. Its a staggering thought . Jesus was His Son.

Grudem in his Systematic Theology :

As Jesus bore the guilt of our sin alone,God the Father, the Almighty Creator, the Lord of the universe, poured out on Jesus the fury of his wrath: Jesus became the object of the intense hatred of sin and vengeance against sin which God had patiently stored up since the beginning of the world.

Calvin says in his commentary on Gal 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."

And we know Jesus and the Apostles did not teach the Father killed the Son but the Jews killed Him on the cross.

hope this helps !!!

 

[civic]

Jesus said who was behind His killing- murder

John 8:39-44
If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you would do what Abraham did. 40 As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things. 41 You are doing the works of your own father.”

“We are not illegitimate children,” they protested. “The only Father we have is God himself.”

42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me. 43 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

hope this helps !!!

 

[civic]

You are fighting a battle you cannot win. Listen to Jesus who said who was behind His murder/killing.

Hear ye HIM !!!!

Kicking against the Pricks.

2 Corinthians 10:5- We tear down ( demolish )arguments and every presumption set up against the knowledge of God; and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

hope this helps !!!

 

[Johann]

You really don't know what Calvinists teach and what they believe. I do since I was one for over 40 years and have most of their books on calvinism and theology. I know what they teach and believe. I don't need google to find out. I know from studying and reading their works in my library.

So once again you are 100 % wrong.

Calvinists teach the Father KILLED the Son so I will quote a few famous ones for you proving what Calvinists actually believe and teach.

MacArthur in the gospel according to God says :

We must remember that sin did not kill Jesus; God did. The suffering servants death was nothing less than a punishment administered by God for the sins committed by others.

Piper says in the passion of the Christ :

The ultimate question to who killed Jesus is God did. Its a staggering thought . Jesus was His Son.

Grudem in his Systematic Theology :

As Jesus bore the guilt of our sin alone,God the Father, the Almighty Creator, the Lord of the universe, poured out on Jesus the fury of his wrath: Jesus became the object of the intense hatred of sin and vengeance against sin which God had patiently stored up since the beginning of the world.

Calvin says in his commentary on Gal 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."

And we know Jesus and the Apostles did not teach the Father killed the Son but the Jews killed Him on the cross.

hope this helps !!!

PSA Defended: Scripture, History, Philosophy, & Rhetoric Archives - BibleThinker

biblethinker.org

If you don't want to listen to the clip-not my problem.

Returning to the NT, we find Christian authors interpreting
Jesus as the sin-bearing Servant of Isaiah 53: “He himself bore
our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to
righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed” (I Pet 2.24).

In light of Isaiah 53, texts like “Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures” (I Cor 15.3), ambiguous when taken in
isolation, become pregnant with meaning. There is no other passage in the Jewish scriptures that could be construed as even
remotely about the Messiah’s dying for people’s sins.

The formulaic expression “died for our sins” thus refers to substitutionary, punitive suffering.8 II Cor 5.21, “For our sake he
made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might

8 This meaning of “for” (hyper) is made clear by expressions like “delivered up for
our trespasses” (Rom 4.25), where “for” translates dia + the accusative, meaning
“on account of,” and “delivered up” and “trespasses” recalls Is 53. 7–8; similarly,
Mk 10.45, where “for” translates anti, meaning “instead of,” “in exchange of.”
The Atonement 19

become the righteousness of God,” is seen to echo in all its parts
Is 53. “Who knew no sin” recalls “the righteous one, my servant,”
in whose mouth was no deceit (vv 9, 11); “for our sake he made
him to be sin” recalls “the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us
all” (v 6); “in him we might become the righteousness of God”
recalls “the righteous one, my servant, [shall] make many to be
accounted righteous” (v 11). Again, no other OT passage remotely
approaches the content of this sentence.

The NT authors, then, following Jesus in his own self-understanding, saw Christ as the suffering Servant of Isaiah 53,
who suffered in the place of sinners, bearing the punishment they
deserved that they might be reconciled to God.

 

[civic]

PSA Defended: Scripture, History, Philosophy, & Rhetoric Archives - BibleThinker

biblethinker.org

If you don't want to listen to the clip-not my problem.

Returning to the NT, we find Christian authors interpreting
Jesus as the sin-bearing Servant of Isaiah 53: “He himself bore
our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to
righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed” (I Pet 2.24).

In light of Isaiah 53, texts like “Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures” (I Cor 15.3), ambiguous when taken in
isolation, become pregnant with meaning. There is no other passage in the Jewish scriptures that could be construed as even
remotely about the Messiah’s dying for people’s sins.

The formulaic expression “died for our sins” thus refers to substitutionary, punitive suffering.8 II Cor 5.21, “For our sake he
made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might

8 This meaning of “for” (hyper) is made clear by expressions like “delivered up for
our trespasses” (Rom 4.25), where “for” translates dia + the accusative, meaning
“on account of,” and “delivered up” and “trespasses” recalls Is 53. 7–8; similarly,
Mk 10.45, where “for” translates anti, meaning “instead of,” “in exchange of.”
The Atonement 19

become the righteousness of God,” is seen to echo in all its parts
Is 53. “Who knew no sin” recalls “the righteous one, my servant,”
in whose mouth was no deceit (vv 9, 11); “for our sake he made
him to be sin” recalls “the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us
all” (v 6); “in him we might become the righteousness of God”
recalls “the righteous one, my servant, [shall] make many to be
accounted righteous” (v 11). Again, no other OT passage remotely
approaches the content of this sentence.

The NT authors, then, following Jesus in his own self-understanding, saw Christ as the suffering Servant of Isaiah 53,
who suffered in the place of sinners, bearing the punishment they
deserved that they might be reconciled to God.

I listened to that broadcast long before you did so it’s old news to me.

You are the one not listening to what Sproul, MacArthur, Grudem, Calvin and others who teach the Father killed the Son via PSA I’ve quoted them and you still won’t admit you are wrong.

I know what they teach since I was under their teaching for decades.

hope this helps !!!

 

[Johann]

You are fighting a battle you cannot win. Listen to Jesus who said who was behind His murder/killing.

I am standing on a solid foundation brother-reading everything against PSA-the anti-PSA guys.

Isa 53:4 Surely He [and no one else] hath borne the punishment for our griefs, and carried the punishment for our sorrows [the judgment brought about by sin]: yet we did esteem Him stricken, smitten by God, and humbled.
Isa 53:5 But He was pierced for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement which procured our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed.

Isa 53:10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.


Deu_11:2 And know ye this day: for I speak not with your children which have not known, and which have not seen the chastisement of the LORD your God, his greatness, his mighty hand, and his stretched out arm,

Job_34:31 Surely it is meet to be said unto God, I have borne chastisement, I will not offend any more:

Isa_53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

Jer_30:14 All thy lovers have forgotten thee; they seek thee not; for I have wounded thee with the wound of an enemy, with the chastisement of a cruel one, for the multitude of thine iniquity; because thy sins were increased.

Heb_12:8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.

ISAIAH 26:16In the BibleVerse Meaning
16 LORD, in trouble have they visited thee, they poured out a prayer when thy chastening was upon them.

ISAIAH 42:25In the BibleVerse Meaning
25 Therefore he hath poured upon him the fury of his anger, and the strength of battle: and it hath set him on fire round about, yet he knew not; and it burned him, yet he laid it not to heart.

ISAIAH 53:4,5Verses in the Bible
4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

Isaiah 53:4 Meaning
5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
Isaiah 53:5 Meaning

ISAIAH 57:16-18Verses in the Bible
16 For I will not contend for ever, neither will I be always wroth: for the spirit should fail before me, and the souls which I have made.

Isaiah 57:16 Meaning
17 For the iniquity of his covetousness was I wroth, and smote him: I hid me, and was wroth, and he went on frowardly in the way of his heart.

Isaiah 57:17 Meaning
18 I have seen his ways, and will heal him: I will lead him also, and restore comforts unto him and to his mourners.
Isaiah 57:18 Meaning

JEREMIAH 2:30In the BibleVerse Meaning
30 In vain have I smitten your children; they received no correction: your own sword hath devoured your prophets, like a destroying lion.

JEREMIAH 30:14In the BibleVerse Meaning
14 All thy lovers have forgotten thee; they seek thee not; for I have wounded thee with the wound of an enemy, with the chastisement of a cruel one, for the multitude of thine iniquity; because thy sins were increased.

JEREMIAH 31:18-20Verses in the Bible
18 I have surely heard Ephraim bemoaning himself thus; Thou hast chastised me, and I was chastised, as a bullock unaccustomed to the yoke: turn thou me, and I shall be turned; for thou art the LORD my God.

Jeremiah 31:18 Meaning
19 Surely after that I was turned, I repented; and after that I was instructed, I smote upon my thigh: I was ashamed, yea, even confounded, because I did bear the reproach of my youth.

Jeremiah 31:19 Meaning
20 Is Ephraim my dear son? is he a pleasant child? for since I spake against him, I do earnestly remember him still: therefore my bowels are troubled for him; I will surely have mercy upon him, saith the LORD.
Jeremiah 31:20 Meaning

JEREMIAH 46:28In the BibleVerse Meaning
28 Fear thou not, O Jacob my servant, saith the LORD: for I am with thee; for I will make a full end of all the nations whither I have driven thee: but I will not make a full end of thee, but correct thee in measure; yet will I not leave thee wholly unpunished.
LAMENTATIONS 1:5In the BibleVerse Meaning

5 Her adversaries are the chief, her enemies prosper; for the LORD hath afflicted her for the multitude of her transgressions: her children are gone into captivity before the enemy.

HOSEA 7:12In the BibleVerse Meaning
12 When they shall go, I will spread my net upon them; I will bring them down as the fowls of the heaven; I will chastise them, as their congregation hath heard.

HOSEA 10:10In the BibleVerse Meaning
10 It is in my desire that I should chastise them; and the people shall be gathered against them, when they shall bind themselves in their two furrows.

HAGGAI 2:17In the BibleVerse Meaning
17 I smote you with blasting and with mildew and with hail in all the labours of your hands; yet ye turned not to me, saith the LORD.

HEBREWS 12:5-11Verses in the Bible
5 And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him:

Hebrews 12:5 Meaning
6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
Hebrews 12:6 Meaning

 

[Johann]

I listened to that broadcast long before you did so it’s old news to me.

Old news to you-but it is making my case.

 

[civic]

I am standing on a solid foundation brother-reading everything against PSA-the anti-PSA guys.

Isa 53:4 Surely He [and no one else] hath borne the punishment for our griefs, and carried the punishment for our sorrows [the judgment brought about by sin]: yet we did esteem Him stricken, smitten by God, and humbled.
Isa 53:5 But He was pierced for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement which procured our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed.

Isa 53:10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.


Deu_11:2 And know ye this day: for I speak not with your children which have not known, and which have not seen the chastisement of the LORD your God, his greatness, his mighty hand, and his stretched out arm,

Job_34:31 Surely it is meet to be said unto God, I have borne chastisement, I will not offend any more:

Isa_53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

Jer_30:14 All thy lovers have forgotten thee; they seek thee not; for I have wounded thee with the wound of an enemy, with the chastisement of a cruel one, for the multitude of thine iniquity; because thy sins were increased.

Heb_12:8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.

Not a single verse above says the Father killed the Son. Nice try.

Listen to what Scripture below teaches who was responsible for Jesus death and killing him. I have provided plenty of passages where Jesus taught it was the Jews and not God who was responsible for His death. See the 18 passages below.

Do you need more as I can give you another dozen passages.

Who was responsible for putting Jesus to death, was it God or man?

Matthew 16:21-From that time on Jesus began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests, and scribes, and that He must be killed and on the third day be raised to life

Matthew 17:23- They will kill Him, and on the third day He will be raised to life." And the disciples were deeply grieved.

Matthew 20:18-19 -“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 and will deliver Him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and crucified.

Matthew 26:66- What do you think?” “He is worthy of death,” they answered.

Matthew 27:1- When the morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death:

Matthew 27:35- When they had crucified Him, they divided up His garments by casting lots.

Mark 8:31- And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.

Mark 10:33- “We are going up to Jerusalem,” he said, “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 and will hand him over to the Gentiles,

Mark 14:64- Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.

Mark 15:24- And they crucified Him. They also divided His garments by casting lots to decide what each of them would take

John 19:7- We have a law," answered the Jews, "and according to that law He must die, because He declared Himself to be the Son of God."

Acts 2:23 This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross

Acts 4:10,11 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole…

Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

Acts 7:52 Was there ever a prophet your ancestors did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him

Acts 13:27 For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him

1 Corinthians 2:8- None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory


conclusion: The Father killing the Son is blasphemy, anti biblical, anti- God .anti- Christ, anti- Christian. Its 100% paganism.

hope this helps !!!

 

[civic]

Old news to you-but it is making my case.lt

yes built upon EISEGESIS.

 

[civic]

I am standing on a solid foundation brother-reading everything against PSA-the anti-PSA guys.

Isa 53:4 Surely He [and no one else] hath borne the punishment for our griefs, and carried the punishment for our sorrows [the judgment brought about by sin]: yet we did esteem Him stricken, smitten by God, and humbled.
Isa 53:5 But He was pierced for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement which procured our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed.

Isa 53:10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.


Deu_11:2 And know ye this day: for I speak not with your children which have not known, and which have not seen the chastisement of the LORD your God, his greatness, his mighty hand, and his stretched out arm,

Job_34:31 Surely it is meet to be said unto God, I have borne chastisement, I will not offend any more:

Isa_53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

Jer_30:14 All thy lovers have forgotten thee; they seek thee not; for I have wounded thee with the wound of an enemy, with the chastisement of a cruel one, for the multitude of thine iniquity; because thy sins were increased.

Heb_12:8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.

Jesus said who was behind His killing- murder. Jesus words oppose your misunderstanding of the O.T.

Jesus is the Authority, not your view. he says below who is responsible.

God is not a murderer- The Jews and the devil are, not God.

You are projecting/equivocating to defend a false doctrine called PSA.

John 8:39-44
If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you would do what Abraham did. 40 As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things. 41 You are doing the works of your own father.”

“We are not illegitimate children,” they protested. “The only Father we have is God himself.”

42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me. 43 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

conclusion: Jesus said the father of lies, the murderer and the Jews like their father the devil planned to kill and murder Jesus, not God

hope this helps !!!

 

[Johann]

Jesus is the Authority, not your view. he says below who is responsible.

Correct-Messiah is my dunamis/excousia and what I deduce from Scriptures is not my "view" or "theory"

Redemption
There are many other facets of the NT doctrine of the atonement,
but space permits mention of but one more: redemption. In the
ancient world, the notion of redemption had to do with the buying
of prisoners of war out of captivity or of slaves out of slavery.

The payment could be called a ransom. For certain OT sacrifices,
a ransom might be substituted for an animal sacrifice as a means of
atonement. God is called Israel’s Redeemer, though as God He
need not pay a ransom to liberate people. God’s great redemptive
act in the OT is the Exodus signaled by the Passover.

As we have seen, Jesus described his mission as giving his life as
“a ransom for many” (Mk 10.45). His life served as a payment for
our liberation from sin’s captivity.

Similarly, NT authors did not
think of our redemption as costless: “you were ransomed ... with
the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish”
(I Pet 1.17–18); “In him we have redemption through his blood”
(Eph 1.7); Christ offered “his own blood, thus securing an eternal
redemption” (Heb 9.12). Paul could therefore remind the
Corinthians, “You were bought with a price” (I Cor 6.20).

The author of Hebrews echoes Jesus’s words at the Last Supper
in seeing his redemptive death as inaugurating a new covenant and
forgiveness of sins: “He is the mediator of a new covenant ... since
a death has occurred which redeems them from the transgressions
under the first covenant” (Heb 9.15). John describes his vision of
worship of the exalted sacrificial lamb:

You are worthy to take the scroll
and to open its seals,
for you were slaughtered and by your blood you ransomed for God
saints from every tribe and language and people and nation;
you have made them to be a kingdom and priests serving our God,
and they will reign on earth.

 

[civic]

Correct-Messiah is my dunamis/excousia and what I deduce from Scriptures is not my "view" or "theory"

its the opposite of what Jesus said and taught as I have demonstrated in this thread with dozens of Scriptures from Jesus and the Apostles as to who was responsible for His death. It was the Jewish leaders who were just like their father the devil- full of lies, hate and murder.

hope this helps!!!

 

[Johann]

Dogmatic History of the Doctrine of the Atonement

Embroiled as they were in debates concerning the person of
Christ, the Church Fathers devoted little time to reflection upon
what later theologians were to call the work of Christ (e.g., his
achieving atonement). No ecumenical council ever pronounced
on the subject of the atonement, leaving the Church without
conciliar guidance. When the Church Fathers did mention the
atonement, their comments were brief and for the most part
unincisive.

The remarks of the Fathers on the atonement tend to reflect the
multiplicity and diversity of the NT motifs that they had inherited
from the biblical authors (Mitros 1967). Eusebius, for example,
wrote:
The Lamb of God ... was chastised on our behalf, and suffered
a penalty He did not owe, but which we owed because of the
multitude of our sins; and so He became the cause of the forgiveness
of our sins, because He received death for us, and transferred to
Himself the scourging, the insults, and the dishonour, which were

due to us, and drew down on Himself the apportioned curse, being
made a curse for us. And what is that but the price of our souls? And
so the oracle says in our person: “By his stripes we were healed,” and
“The Lord delivered him for our sins.”
(Demonstration of the Gospel 10.1)

Echoing Isaiah 53 and Gal 3.13, Eusebius employs the motifs of
sacrifice, vicarious suffering, penal substitution, satisfaction of
divine justice, and ransom price. Similar sentiments were
expressed by Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, John Chrysostom, Cyril
of Alexandria, and others (Rivière 1909).

At the same time, the Fathers portrayed Christ’s death as
a tremendous victory won over Satan, a view of the atonement
that has come to be known as the Christus Victor theory (Aulén
1969). Modern scholars have tended to focus on this facet of the
Fathers’ teaching, doubtless because of its peculiarity and
curiosity.

2.1 Christus Victor Theory
The so-called Christus Victor theory of the atonement persisted for
about 900 years, from Irenaeus and Origen until the time of
Anselm. According to this viewpoint, the sacrifice of Christ’s life
served to deliver mankind from bondage to Satan and from the
corruption and death that are the consequences of sin. The Fathers
sometimes interpreted Jesus’s ransom saying very literally to mean
that Christ’s life was a payment in exchange for which human
beings were set free from bondage. Such an interpretation naturally raised the question as to whom the ransom was paid.

The obvious answer was the devil, since it was he who held men
in bondage (II Tim 2.26; I Jn 5.19). God agreed to give His Son over
to Satan’s power in exchange for the human beings he held captive.
Origen, for example, asked,
But to whom did Christ give his soul for ransom? Surely not to God.
Could it then be to the Evil One? For he had us in his power until the
ransom for us should be given to him, even the life of Christ. The Evil
The Atonement 29

One had been deceived and led to suppose that he was capable of
mastering the soul and did not see that to hold him involved a trial
of strength greater than he could successfully undertake ... . Hence
it was not with gold or with perishable money that we were
redeemed, but with the precious blood of Christ.
(Commentary on Matthew xvi.8)

 

[Johann]

its the opposite of what Jesus said and taught as I have demonstrated in this thread with dozens of Scriptures from Jesus and the Apostles as to who was responsible for His death. It was the Jewish leaders who were just like their father the devil- full of lies, hate and murder.

not so-

Dogmatic History of the Doctrine of the Atonement
Embroiled as they were in debates concerning the person of
Christ, the Church Fathers devoted little time to reflection upon
what later theologians were to call the work of Christ (e.g., his
achieving atonement). No ecumenical council ever pronounced
on the subject of the atonement, leaving the Church without
conciliar guidance. When the Church Fathers did mention the
atonement, their comments were brief and for the most part
unincisive.

The remarks of the Fathers on the atonement tend to reflect the
multiplicity and diversity of the NT motifs that they had inherited
from the biblical authors (Mitros 1967). Eusebius, for example,
wrote:

The Lamb of God ... was chastised on our behalf, and suffered
a penalty He did not owe, but which we owed because of the
multitude of our sins; and so He became the cause of the forgiveness
of our sins, because He received death for us, and transferred to
Himself the scourging, the insults, and the dishonour, which were==

due to us, and drew down on Himself the apportioned curse, being
made a curse for us. And what is that but the price of our souls? And
so the oracle says in our person: “By his stripes we were healed,” and
“The Lord delivered him for our sins.”
(Demonstration of the Gospel 10.1)

Echoing Isaiah 53 and Gal 3.13, Eusebius employs the motifs of
sacrifice, vicarious suffering, penal substitution, satisfaction of
divine justice, and ransom price.

Similar sentiments were
expressed by Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, John Chrysostom, Cyril
of Alexandria, and others (Rivière 1909).
At the same time, the Fathers portrayed Christ’s death as
a tremendous victory won over Satan, a view of the atonement
that has come to be known as the Christus Victor theory (Aulén
1969). Modern scholars have tended to focus on this facet of the
Fathers’ teaching, doubtless because of its peculiarity and
curiosity.

2.1 Christus Victor Theory

The so-called Christus Victor theory of the atonement persisted for
about 900 years, from Irenaeus and Origen until the time of
Anselm.

According to this viewpoint, the sacrifice of Christ’s life
served to deliver mankind from bondage to Satan and from the
corruption and death that are the consequences of sin. The Fathers
sometimes interpreted Jesus’s ransom saying very literally to mean
that Christ’s life was a payment in exchange for which human
beings were set free from bondage. Such an interpretation naturally raised the question as to whom the ransom was paid.

The obvious answer was the devil, since it was he who held men
in bondage (II Tim 2.26; I Jn 5.19). God agreed to give His Son over
to Satan’s power in exchange for the human beings he held captive.
Origen, for example, asked,

But to whom did Christ give his soul for ransom? Surely not to God.
Could it then be to the Evil One? For he had us in his power until the
ransom for us should be given to him, even the life of Christ. The Evil

One had been deceived and led to suppose that he was capable of
mastering the soul and did not see that to hold him involved a trial
of strength greater than he could successfully undertake ... . Hence
it was not with gold or with perishable money that we were
redeemed, but with the precious blood of Christ.
(Commentary on Matthew xvi.8)

 

[civic]

Sola Scripture

1-Jesus and the Apostles taught the Jews killed Him, not God
2- Jesus laid down His life, no one took it from Him
3- Jesus said He gave His life as a Ransom
4- Jesus said He gave His life a sacrifice for our sins
5- Jesus said He gave His life for the forgiveness of sins
6- Jesus said He gave His life as a substitution

hope this helps !!!

 

[civic]

Notice who is using the Bible and who is using secondary sources. Notice the difference in foundations- Solid Rock vs sinking sand.