Where's the wrath??
- Thread starter Joe
- Start date
That really does not deal with the issue I raised
Yes ransom, Moral influence , recapitulation (restored icon) were early theories but why should we reject them based on being the earliest of the theories to be put foward
All atonement theories are of course theories - interpretations of the data set which is the life, death and resurrection of Christ.
PSA as you noted was formulated upon the back of Anselm's satisfaction theory and as such it incorporates the claims of his theory as well as the claims of Augustine and those of the reformers
The wrath of God is not mentioned. You have to assume that
Johann
Well-known member
You are very good at circular reasoning and not reading what is posted and it DOES deal with the issue I have raised.
Johann
Well-known member
The "trinity" is not mentioned-you have to assume that-
"I am God is" not mentioned-you have to assume that.
Sorry but that is false
The issue is what does PSA entail
you have denied claims which PSA affirms
Examine the video link to see what those inherent claims PSA entails
So what?
This is not an argument about the trinity or the deity of Christ.
Those things are proven through the use of scripture.
So also if you want to prove God was wrathful toward Christ then you need to do so using scripture.
Christ saying if possible, take this cup from me is not evidence of God expressing wrath upon the son.
Johann
Well-known member
Rabbit trail-I asked WHICH theory holds water?
You are changing the subject
All atonement models are theories
Are you asking me which theories I hold to
I hold to a number not believing any one theory capable of accurately representing all the life, death and resurrection of Christ entail
Truth may be found in the ransom, the moral influence, recapitulation (restored icon), Christus victus, Government, Preistly sacrificial, the two goat theory etc
and I suppose some in PSA and satisfaction theories though I reject the commercial aspect of both as well as some other particulars
Johann
Well-known member
Here is what Paul Vendredi holds to--as a Catholic-
Gregory of Nazianzus (c. 329–390 AD), one of the Cappadocian Fathers, made significant contributions to Christian theology, particularly in the areas of the Trinity and Christology. His thoughts on the atonement reflect a complex and nuanced understanding of Christ's work.
Gregory of Nazianzus did not systematize a single atonement theory like some later theologians, but his writings contain reflections on the significance of Jesus' death and resurrection. One of his key statements regarding the atonement can be found in his famous "Oration 45: On Holy Pascha (Easter)."
Key Excerpt from Oration 45
In Oration 45, Gregory discusses the mystery and implications of Christ’s passion, emphasizing both the divine and human aspects of Jesus’ work. Here's a relevant passage:
"He lays down his life, but he has the power to take it again; and the veil is rent, for the mysterious doors of heaven are opened; the rocks are cleft, the dead arise. He dies, but he gives life, and by his death destroys death. He is buried, but he rises again; he goes down into hell, but he brings up the souls; he ascends to heaven, and shall come again to judge the quick and the dead."
Analysis
Victory over Death (Christus Victor): Gregory emphasizes that by Jesus’ death, He destroys death. This aligns with the Christus Victor model of atonement, where Christ’s death and resurrection defeat the powers of sin, death, and the devil.
The Power and Authority of Christ: He stresses that Jesus has the power to lay down His life and take it up again, highlighting the divine authority and voluntary nature of Christ's sacrifice.
Redemption and Resurrection: Gregory speaks of Jesus going down into hell and bringing up souls, indicating a belief in the harrowing of hell – the idea that Jesus descended to the dead to liberate the righteous who had died before His coming.
[This is error] Johann however this would fit in with the Catholic beliefs-no offense to my Catholic brothers and sisters IN Christ Jesus.
Judgment: He also points to Christ’s future role as judge of the living and the dead, linking the atonement with eschatological themes of judgment and redemption.
Gregory of Nazianzus’s views on the atonement are deeply rooted in the mystery of the Incarnation and the transformative power of Christ's death and resurrection. He sees Jesus’ atoning work as a multifaceted event that encompasses victory over evil, the restoration of life, and the ultimate reconciliation of humanity with God.
His theological reflections are less about creating a systematic theory and more about celebrating the profound and mysterious nature of Christ’s saving work. This approach underscores the holistic and encompassing nature of the atonement in the early Church Fathers' writings.
However-having said this--
It is accurate to say that the early Church Fathers did not develop a single, systematic theory of atonement as later theologians did. Instead, their writings reflect a variety of themes and understandings concerning the significance of Christ's death and resurrection. They approached the atonement in a more holistic and multifaceted manner, often intertwining different aspects of Jesus' saving work. Here’s an overview of how some of the key early Church Fathers contributed to atonement theology:
Key Themes in Early Church Fathers' Writings on Atonement
- Christus Victor (Victory over Death and Evil)
- Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130-202 AD): Emphasized the victory of Christ over sin and death. In "Against Heresies," he speaks of Christ as the one who recapitulates human history and defeats the powers of evil.
- Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296-373 AD): In "On the Incarnation," Athanasius describes the incarnation and death of Christ as the means by which He conquers death and corruption, restoring humanity to life.
- Ransom Theory (Payment to Free Humanity from Bondage)
- Origen of Alexandria (c. 184-253 AD): Articulated the idea that Christ’s death was a ransom paid to Satan to free humanity from bondage to sin and death.
- Gregory of Nyssa (c. 335-395 AD): Expanded on the ransom idea, describing Christ's humanity as bait to trap Satan, thus freeing humanity from his grip.
- Moral Influence Theory (Transformation through Divine Love)
- Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215 AD): Saw Christ's life and death as a demonstration of God's love intended to inspire moral improvement in humanity.
- Origen of Alexandria: Also contributed to the idea that Christ's example has a moral and transformative impact on believers.
- Recapitulation (Restoration through Christ’s Life and Death)
- Irenaeus of Lyons: Introduced the concept of recapitulation, where Christ, as the new Adam, re-lives human history correctly, thus undoing the damage caused by the first Adam's disobedience.
Lack of Systematic Theories
The early Church Fathers did not create formalized atonement theories as later theologians like Anselm (Satisfaction Theory) or the Reformers (Penal Substitution). Instead, their writings are characterized by a more integrated and diverse approach, often addressing different aspects of Christ's work without attempting to systematize them into a single cohesive theory.Holistic Approach
While individual Church Fathers may have emphasized certain themes more than others, together they provide a holistic view of atonement that includes:- Victory over evil and death (Christus Victor)
- Payment of a ransom (Ransom Theory)
- Moral transformation through Christ’s example (Moral Influence Theory)
- Restoration and recapitulation of human history (Recapitulation)
So, while it is correct that they did not write a single, systematic view of atonement, their collective contributions offer a comprehensive and multifaceted understanding of this central Christian doctrine.
So how sure is Paul Vendredi on one theory-as a Catholic-but ignoring the other views or data sets? Since Gregory is dead wrong on this?
Redemption and Resurrection: Gregory speaks of Jesus going down into hell and bringing up souls, indicating a belief in the harrowing of hell – the idea that Jesus descended to the dead to liberate the righteous who had died before His coming.
[This is error] Johann The very man Paul Vendredi you hold as having the "correct theory?"
civic
Well-known member
Ditto
Behold
Well-known member
Jesus said that "no man takes my life from me, as i have the power to lay it down and the power to take it up again".
He was referring to what was coming...
And here we see Jesus in the situation, and He ask's The Father to "let it pass"< So, here we see the Will of Jesus, which is to not be judged, yet He is accepting of His Father's will, which shows that Jesus, as any other Human has free will.
KJ21
And He went a little farther, and fell on His face and prayed, saying, “O My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as Thou wilt.”
ASV
And he went forward a little, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass away from me: nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt.
AMP
And after going a little farther, He fell face down and prayed, saying, “My Father, if it is possible [that is, consistent with Your will], let this cup pass from Me; yet not as I will, but as You will.”
When Jesus was finished "becoming sin for us", and our Salvation was attained, Jesus said from the Cross "it is Finished"..
After the resurrection, and after the ascension, Jesus "Sat down " In Heaven as He had finished our Salvation.
civic
Well-known member
Wrath- strongs 3709 ὀργή is defined in the Greek lexicon as anger, retribution, vengeance, and indignation. God is not against Himself angrily displaying wrath from the Father to the Son. God is love. In love, He sent His Son. The wrath bearing Son is a new concept not found in Scripture nor the early church fathers (ECFs). God is not against Himself. No one in the Trinity is in opposition, no conflict, no dissension, no strife, no disunity, no dysfunction. As if God were somehow like a sinful human family. There is nothing broken in Our Blessed Trinity.
Jesus bearing God’s wrath and being despised and forsaken by the Father and Him turning His back on the Son is not found in the pages of Scripture. That doctrine was developed in the dark ages during the Reformation and called Penal Substitution Theory of the Atonement or (PSA)
Calvin's comments on Galatians 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."
The following scriptures affirm that Jesus' relationship with the Father on the cross was still there and not broken.
Psalm 22:24
For he has not despised or scorned
the suffering of the afflicted one;
he has not hidden his face from him
but has listened to his cry for help.
Luke 23:46
Jesus called out with a loud voice, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." When he had said this, he breathed his last.
John 16:32
"A time is coming and in fact has come when you will be scattered, each to your own home. You will leave me all alone. Yet I am not alone, for my Father is with me."
Hebrews 5:7
During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with fervent cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission.
Jesus' promise to the thief on the cross that today you will be with Me in Paradise reaffirms Jesus went to be with the Father and not suffer in hell as some teach.
Jesus bearing God's “cup of wrath” and being despised and forsaken by the Father and Him turning His back on the Son is not found in Scripture.
In Matthew 26:39, Jesus says, "If it be your will, let this cup pass from me." Jesus tells us precisely what the cup was. It was the cup of his suffering, which meant that He would die an agonizing death as a martyr. In the passage below, Jesus told His disciples that they would also drink of the same "cup":
Matthew 20:17-
Now Jesus was going up to Jerusalem. On the way, he took the Twelve aside and said to them, 18 “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 19 and will hand him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and crucified. On the third day he will be raised to life!”20 Then the mother of Zebedee’s sons came to Jesus with her sons and, kneeling down, asked a favor of him. 21 “What is it you want?” he asked. She said, "Grant that one of these two sons of mine may sit at your right and the other at your left in your kingdom."22 “You don’t know what you are asking,” Jesus said to them. “Can you drink the cup I am going to drink?” “We can,” they answered. 23 Jesus said to them, “You will indeed drink from my cup, but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared by my Father.”
1Thessalonians 5:9-For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.
As we see above it was not the cup of wrath Jesus was speaking about but it was the suffering He was going to have to endure for our sins. God has not appointed us to wrath and the cup means the suffering of Jesus and that the disciples would also suffer death as martyrs. In fact, many scriptures testify that believers too will suffer persecution for being a follower of Jesus. Suffering persecution is a promise for a believer who follows Jesus, it is something we should expect to happen in our life.
2 Timothy 3:12- Yes, and everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution.
John 15:20
Remember the word that I spoke to you: 'No servant is greater than his master.' If they persecuted Me, they will persecute you as well; if they kept My word, they will keep yours as well.
Matthew 5:10 - Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
2 Corinthians 4:9- persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed.
hope this helps !!!
Behold
Well-known member
And then Calvin said that this Great Sacrifice, this Amazing Grace of God, .. is not offered to everyone.
So, that Cross rejecting Lie is the "issue" that God has with Calvin, and that God has with Calvinism and "Tulip" and also with all the deceived who preach it and teach it as "Bible".
Its not Bible.
Its a "doctrine of devils'.... Hebrews 13:9
civic
Well-known member
I was using calvin as a hostile witness against Gods word.
Behold
Well-known member
Brother, He is at least that one..
Calvin will get His disciples killed...
How?
.its becaues.. once Calvin's Disciples become convinced that "its all pre-destined" then if they get cancer, or if their mother does or their child, then they are unable to have any faith in God for HEALING, as Calvin has them under the spell of false "pre-destination" theology that destroy's a Christians faith, as its designed to do.
There is no way a person who is lost in Calvinism and TULIP, who is convinced that God causes all the evil, and pre-destined you to suffer with Cancer, = if you get it from the Devil........there is no way you can go to God in Faith, when your faith in God is that He pre-destined it.
So, Calvin just killed you and the Devil is laughing, and the person thinks the entire time its "God".. doing it.
= CRAZY = Demonic... Theology.
Calvinism - Tulip, will get you killed.
Reader....Avoid it like you would avoid Death, as its theological and spiritual poison.
Another example..
Let say that a Calvinist or a TULIP is trying to prove this...
."im a child of Fornication", and then say that "God pre-destined that", ..so = that is accusing God of using fornication to bring them here.
That wont fit a Holy God but it works just fine for demonic Calvinism and TULIP. = Doctrine.
Or if someone is a child of RAPE, and the TULIP says......."God predestined by mother to be raped by 6 men behind a Retail store, at 3am after they kidnapped her, ......= So that "doctrine" wont fit God's Holiness, as that is accusing God of pre-destining the RAPES that caused the Birth.
So, once we get into "its all pre-destined" then it hits a brick wall once you see a few things that will never add up to HOLY God causing it, as they (Calvin//TULIP) = would accuse Holy God, falsely.
Ive talked to Calvin-Tulip people who are so drowned into Calvinism and TULIP, that they believe that Hitler was PRE-destined to become Hitler.
Ive talked to these religious wackos, that idolize Calvin and TULIP to the point that they teach..."God pre-destined ADAM and EVE to obey the Devil"....
And that Ted Bundy was pre-destined by God to murder 30 + women and cut off their heads...
And God pre-destined, according to Calvin/TULIP>. that Hamas would go into Israel last Oct 7 and burn babies to death, and families with them....
So, once Calvinism & TULIP gets going, there is no end to its ability , its demonic ability and purpose.... to try to Blame God for what the DEVIL Causes.
And the Devil loves that as He created Calvinism and TULIP to deny (Limit) The Cross, and get "christians' to blame God and accuse God of doing the DEVIL'S deeds.
Last edited:
yes and the church never coalesced on any single theory of atonement.
If you read what I stated you should have seen
Yes ransom, Moral influence , recapitulation (restored icon) were early theories but why should we reject them based on being the earliest of the theories to be put foward
All atonement theories are of course theories - interpretations of the data set which is the life, death and resurrection of Christ.
PSA as you noted was formulated upon the back of Anselm's satisfaction theory and as such it incorporates the claims of his theory as well as the claims of Augustine and those of the reformers.
I also stated there was no one single atonement theory which can express all that is in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ and that there was truth in many of the theories.
All atonement models are theories
Now where did i state what you claim?
Paul Vendredi was posted to show the claims of the Penal substititution theory which you previously seemed to be unaware of
My words were
"Examine the video link to see what those inherent claims PSA entails"
Further the view he espouses is the recapitulation view (he calls it the restored icon)held by some in the early church and many in eastern orthodoxy which co host Warren McGrew holds to along with ransom and moral influence which were the prevalent views of the early church
Ps the idea jesus descended into hell really hades is a common view of the orthodox and appears in the apostles creed
you can also read about it here at christianity.com
Did Jesus Really Descend to Hell Between His Death and Resurrection?
Read Did Jesus Really Descend to Hell Between His Death and Resurrection? by Christianity.com Editorial Staff and more articles about Jesus Christ and Wiki on Christianity.com
www.christianity.com
Last edited:
civic
Well-known member
Yes which makes PSA the newest theory in church history null and void.
civic
Well-known member
YepIf you read what I stated you should have seen
Yes ransom, Moral influence , recapitulation (restored icon) were early theories but why should we reject them based on being the earliest of the theories to be put foward
All atonement theories are of course theories - interpretations of the data set which is the life, death and resurrection of Christ.
PSA as you noted was formulated upon the back of Anselm's satisfaction theory and as such it incorporates the claims of his theory as well as the claims of Augustine and those of the reformers.
I also stated there was no one single atonement theory which can express all that is in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ and that there was truth in many of the theories.
All atonement models are theories
Now where did i state what you claim?
Paul Vendredi was posted to show the claims of the Penal substititution theory which you previously seemed to be unaware of
My words were
"Examine the video link to see what those inherent claims PSA entails"
Further the view he espouses is the recapitulation view (he calls it the restored icon)held by some in the early church and many in eastern orthodoxy which co host Warren McGrew holds to along with ransom and moral influence which were the prevalent views of the early church
Ps the idea jesus descended into hell really hades is a common view of the orthodox and appears in the apostles creed
you can also read about it here at christianity.com
Did Jesus Really Descend to Hell Between His Death and Resurrection?
Read Did Jesus Really Descend to Hell Between His Death and Resurrection? by Christianity.com Editorial Staff and more articles about Jesus Christ and Wiki on Christianity.com
Similar threads
