That is not quite accurate.
You are correct in the fact that I do not subscribe to the penal substitution view of the atonement. You are incorrect to say that I said that Christ did not die for our sins, he most definitely did.
Rom 3:25
Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Penal substitution was developed by John Calvin on the back of Anselm of Cantebury's satisfaction view.
John Calvin was a lawyer and thus saw Christ's death on the cross in a purely legal sense.
John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion.
http://www.reformed.org/master/index.html?mainframe=/documents/Christ_in_hell/
The early church never taught such a thing. This teaching takes the focus off of the actual teachings of Christ it put it purely on the "substitutionary atonement." It is out of this teaching that the doctrine of "future" sins being already forgiven is born, which directly contradicts Rom 3:25.
Rom 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of
sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Jesus did not suffer as a wrath substitute for the sinner. He bore our sins as a sin offering without spot and blemish. If he became spotted by sin on that cross then he would not have been acceptable to God. he didn't offer Himself as a sinner in our place.
Heb_9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit
offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
When we walk in the light the blood cleanses us of our past sins. Not future sins.
1Jn 1:7 But
if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and
the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
The penal substitution view of the atonement completely redefines the meaning of the cross.
It takes the focus off of the teachings of Jesus and focuses exclusively on the cross. Yes it is true that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin, but it is also true that one cannot access this sin offering and be remitted of their past sin without a genuine repentance.
Mar_1:4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the
baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.
Luk_24:47 And that
repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
We can only be reconciled to God through repentance and faith whereby we gain access to His grace and the blood can be applied to us. SATAN KNOWS THIS and that is why he perverts doctrine. Subtle errors are introduced which lead error upon error and eventually you have a system of error.
The Bible warned that this would happen, the Bible warned that many false teachers would come and that they would deceive a multitude. The Bible also warns that a multitude would stand before Christ utterly rejected and it says that these people were workers of iniquity. Satan deceived them and kept them in rebellion to God, kept them in bondage to their sin by getting them to buy into a false gospel. A gospel with no power to overcome sin and bring real redemption.
Instead of obeying, striving, crucifying the old man, picking up your cross, holding steadfast, digging deep, the gospel is been reduced down to simply confessing your a sinner, trusting in a provision, and receiving the free gift and then waiting on God to clean you up. That is not the gospel, not even close, yet it is taught in basically every pulpit across the land.
In Jeremiah's day the religious system was totally apostate, it was the same in Jesus day, it is exactly the same today. It looks like a lamb but speaks the language of the dragon and they are dispensing the mark upon millions. No one is told that they must pluck out the eye or cut off the hand, no, people are coddled in their sins and told that God is working with them and eventually they will overcome, but if you don't God still loves you and understands. Grace is this cloak for sin.
Repentance has been reduced to a mere confession.
Faith is now trust in a provision.
Salvation is simply having the condemnation removed.
Grace is just a free gift and nothing more.
Doesn't anyone find it strange that Jesus would say you cannot serve two masters yet in the church system you can?
Isn't it strange that Jesus would say that a good true does not produce bad fruit but in the church system it can and does?
Was Jesus just playing games here? Think about it.
The early church viewed the atonement as a ransom, not a substitution. They saw Jesus as ransoming us by his blood from the corrupting influence of sin.
That scripture does not say anything about Jesus being your wrath substitute. You read that into the verse. It clearly says that His death on the cross expiates PAST SINS, through faith by the mercy of God.
The imputed righteousness teaching is another false doctrine taught today. Faith is imputed as righteousness.
There is nowhere in the Bible where it says that Jesus obeyed for you. There is nowhere in Scripture that it says that Jesus obedient track record is credited to your account so that when God sees you He sees the righteousness of Jesus. That is heresy.
Such teaching is read into Rom 3:22 and 2 Cor 5:21. Those verses don't say that. Jesus never taught any such thing anywhere. Jesus said obey, deny yourself, pick up your cross, stop sinning, follow me, strive, etc. All that is thrown out the window due to these heresies in the church system.
Where does the Bible specifically say, without conjecture, that the righteousness of Jesus Christ is credited to the believers account?
Why didn't Jesus teach any such thing in anything He said?
It is all another gospel which, when the fluff is removed, is saying you can continue to sin and not die.
