L
Ladodgers6
Guest
Leviticus 17:11
For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life.
God is not the one making a sacrifice for Himself. It is the sinner who makes the sacrifice for his own sins in the atonement.
Calvinists have their types wrong as it was the" PAGAN " practice of the false gods who sacrificed their own children to baal.
Wow! And the strange gets stranger, how can we offer anything to God, if God did not instruct the OT believers on how to present the Sin-Offering to God? God gave specific instruction on how a chosen Priest (typological-of the High Priest-Christ Himself), would enter the inner most holies of holies to intercede for the people sins; Christ intercedes for His people at the right hand of God! Once the Priest lays His hands of the sacrificial offering, The sins of the people would be transferred or imputed to this sacrifice, and slaughter, blood must be spilled on the altar. Christ being slaughtered, spilled his blood for his people, and hung on the tree, removing the curse by becoming a curse for us!
When those who were translating the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek looked for a word to describe God’s forgiveness, in reference to his anger, they choose the term hilsokomai in a number of instances. The idea in view by using that specific term is certainly a turning aside of anger through the offering of a sacrifice (cf. Ex 32:14, Ps 78:38, and Lam 3:42).3 But the term’s full meaning is seen most clearly in the New Testament when it is applied to the cross of Christ. When John speaks of the death of Christ as a “propitiation [hilasmos] for our sins” (1 Jn 2:2; 4:10), the meaning is clear. Christ’s death on the cross turns aside God’s wrath that otherwise would be directed toward us in the judgment because of our sins. Christ accomplishes this for us through his offering up of himself as the sacrifice on whom God has poured out his anger. Christ shed his blood then, in part, to appease the Holy God's anger toward our sins.4 The same idea is in view in Romans 3:25. Paul says that “God presented his Son as a propitiation [hilasterion],” to demonstrate his justice–he will indeed forgive sin only because he punishes it in Christ–and so that he can justify those who have faith in his Son. Since God cannot simply overlook sin but must punish it, Christ must stand in the sinner’s stead. The guilt of the sinner’s sin has been dealt with in that Christ’s shed blood turns aside the wrath of God toward the sinner, thereby removing that guilt from him or her. In this sense, the concept of propitiation is foundational to understanding not only the substitutionary aspect of the atonement, but also forensic justification as well. The reason that sinners can be justified at all is that the guilt for their own sins has been imputed to Christ, so that Christ in turn can turn aside God’s wrath toward sinners by being punished for the sinner in the sinner’s place (Phil 3:9). Perhaps James Denny put it best when he said, “the simplest word of faith is the deepest word of theology: Christ died for our sins.”
These OT sacrifices were typological and shadows of the ultimate sacrifice the OT sacrifices were pointing to, Christ Himself! If God doesn't punish sin, or has fury and wrath against then why are we in this predicament, needing a Savior? If God is nothing but Love as these deniers say. Then why do people go to hell? Bigger question why does Christ have to be Crucified at all? If God let's sin go unpunished, then he's not a Holy a Just God. This then would change his attributes. God will not allow sin to go unpunished. It's ridiculous to say otherwise. Those who deny Christ being a type or shadow have a misunderstanding that Christ is revealed in all Scripture, from Genesis to Revelations. And it all points to Christ as the unfolding redemption plan through time and history from the OT to the fulfillment in the NT.
When those who were translating the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek looked for a word to describe God’s forgiveness, in reference to his anger, they choose the term hilsokomai in a number of instances. The idea in view by using that specific term is certainly a turning aside of anger through the offering of a sacrifice (cf. Ex 32:14, Ps 78:38, and Lam 3:42).3 But the term’s full meaning is seen most clearly in the New Testament when it is applied to the cross of Christ. When John speaks of the death of Christ as a “propitiation [hilasmos] for our sins” (1 Jn 2:2; 4:10), the meaning is clear. Christ’s death on the cross turns aside God’s wrath that otherwise would be directed toward us in the judgment because of our sins. Christ accomplishes this for us through his offering up of himself as the sacrifice on whom God has poured out his anger. Christ shed his blood then, in part, to appease the Holy God's anger toward our sins.4 The same idea is in view in Romans 3:25. Paul says that “God presented his Son as a propitiation [hilasterion],” to demonstrate his justice–he will indeed forgive sin only because he punishes it in Christ–and so that he can justify those who have faith in his Son. Since God cannot simply overlook sin but must punish it, Christ must stand in the sinner’s stead. The guilt of the sinner’s sin has been dealt with in that Christ’s shed blood turns aside the wrath of God toward the sinner, thereby removing that guilt from him or her. In this sense, the concept of propitiation is foundational to understanding not only the substitutionary aspect of the atonement, but also forensic justification as well. The reason that sinners can be justified at all is that the guilt for their own sins has been imputed to Christ, so that Christ in turn can turn aside God’s wrath toward sinners by being punished for the sinner in the sinner’s place (Phil 3:9). Perhaps James Denny put it best when he said, “the simplest word of faith is the deepest word of theology: Christ died for our sins.”
These OT sacrifices were typological and shadows of the ultimate sacrifice the OT sacrifices were pointing to, Christ Himself! If God doesn't punish sin, or has fury and wrath against then why are we in this predicament, needing a Savior? If God is nothing but Love as these deniers say. Then why do people go to hell? Bigger question why does Christ have to be Crucified at all? If God let's sin go unpunished, then he's not a Holy a Just God. This then would change his attributes. God will not allow sin to go unpunished. It's ridiculous to say otherwise. Those who deny Christ being a type or shadow have a misunderstanding that Christ is revealed in all Scripture, from Genesis to Revelations. And it all points to Christ as the unfolding redemption plan through time and history from the OT to the fulfillment in the NT.
For [Christ] himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility.
—Ephesians 2:14-16
God, in order to remove any obstacle to his love towards us, appointed the method of reconciliation in Christ. There is great force in this word propitiation; for in a manner which cannot be expressed, God, at the very time when he loved us, was hostile to us until reconciled in Christ... The nature of this mystery is to be learned from the first chapter to the Ephesians, where Paul, teaching that we were chosen in Christ, at the same time adds, that we obtained grace in him. How did God begin to embrace with his favour those whom he had loved before the foundation of the world, unless in displaying his love when he was reconciled by the blood of Christ?
- John Calvin (1509-1564), The Institutes of the Christian Religion, v. I [1559]
The second requirement of our reconciliation with God was this: that man, who by his disobedience had become lost, should by way of remedy counter it with obedience, satisfy God’s judgment, and pay the penalties for sin. Accordingly, our Lord came forth as true man and took the person and the name of Adam in order to take Adam’s place in obeying the Father, to present our flesh as the price of satisfaction to God’s righteous judgment, and, in the same flesh, to pay the penalty that we had deserved. (Institutes, II.xvi.3)
But that these things may take root firmly and deeply in our hearts, let us keep sacrifice and cleansing constantly in mind. For we could not believe with assurance that Christ is our redemption, ransom, and propitiation unless he had been a sacrificial victim. Blood is accordingly mentioned wherever Scripture discusses the mode of redemption. Yet Christ’s shed blood served, not only as a satisfaction, but also as a laver [cf. Eph. 5:26; Titus 3:5; Rev. 1:5] to wash away our corruption. (Inst., II.xvi.6)
- John Calvin (1509-1564), The Institutes of the Christian Religion, v. I [1559]
The second requirement of our reconciliation with God was this: that man, who by his disobedience had become lost, should by way of remedy counter it with obedience, satisfy God’s judgment, and pay the penalties for sin. Accordingly, our Lord came forth as true man and took the person and the name of Adam in order to take Adam’s place in obeying the Father, to present our flesh as the price of satisfaction to God’s righteous judgment, and, in the same flesh, to pay the penalty that we had deserved. (Institutes, II.xvi.3)
But that these things may take root firmly and deeply in our hearts, let us keep sacrifice and cleansing constantly in mind. For we could not believe with assurance that Christ is our redemption, ransom, and propitiation unless he had been a sacrificial victim. Blood is accordingly mentioned wherever Scripture discusses the mode of redemption. Yet Christ’s shed blood served, not only as a satisfaction, but also as a laver [cf. Eph. 5:26; Titus 3:5; Rev. 1:5] to wash away our corruption. (Inst., II.xvi.6)
Know what you believe and why you believe!