Tag Info

It's both, not one or the other. It started in Gethsemane and was completed on Golgotha. http://www.lds.org/ensign/1985/05/the-purifying-power-of-gethsemane We do not know, we cannot tell, no mortal mind can conceive the full import of what Christ did in Gethsemane. We know he sweat great gouts of blood from every pore as he drained the dregs ...

tl;dr> If Jesus isn't separated from the Father on the Cross, then the heresy of patripassianism is true, and more importantly, the notion that God does not change is not. 1. Scripture sets up cases that separate the Father from the Son Scripturally the idea that Jesus was separated from the Father is typically supported from when Jesus cries out in ...

There are several ideas about the atonement that can come under the heading of Christus Victor. Ultimately, the term could apply to any account of the atonement that accords with: The work of Christ is first and foremost a victory over the powers which hold mankind in bondage: sin, death and the devil. 1 One of the reasons why it is a bit hard to pin ...

Christus Victor Christus Victor (CV) is, simply put, a understanding of soteriology where Christ paid to Satan a ransom to free man from Hell. In The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, Aslan pays the queen the freedom of Edmund. Calvinist position The calvinist position states that Christ gave his life to safe those who would repent. Therefore his death ...

Interesting. Yes. Salvation required the sacrifice of a perfect and immaculate victim. This means that it was required of Christ to do everything in accordance with God's will. There is of course no question that He could and did carry out this obligation. He was perfectly obedient. If He was not, He could not serve as an appropriate sacrifice. But then, ...

The question, as stated, presents an misunderstood view of the economy of salvation. And although it is ultimately a mystery, we can say a fair amount about sin and salvation that makes Christ's sacrifice more reasonable sounding, and the possibility of "self-salvation" far less reasonable sounding. In essence, God created humans to be like God, humans ...

Limited atonement brings with it the implication that not anyone can be saved by Christ - only those for whom he atoned. The language used in the Bible to describe salvation is inclusive. It is described as being presented to whosoever wills. In 1 Timothy, Paul claims that God desires all people to be saved. 1 Timothy 2:3-6 (ESV) 3  This is ...

There are two reasons why the sacrifice needed to be perfect. First, if the sacrifice was not perfect, the sacrifice would only be paying for his own sins. Second, the perfect life of the sacrifice satisfies the human side of the covenant, so by receiving the righteousness of the sacrifice, the saved person receives the fullness of the promises. (This is ...

This seems to be a misunderstanding of terms on your part. Remember first that our English translations often miss nuances in translation. Words carry different meanings. These phrases are generally understood to mean that Jesus paid the price for our sins. That can certainly connote the idea of a purchase in the normal sense, as in "I paid for my ...

When I face this issue I think sometimes it’s just about semantics. For example, of course only those who are saved, Christ died for, because as He knew all men from eternity. He knew who He was dying for, in terms of actually providing real forgiveness to. However, with the hyper Calvinistic view (which I think you are referring to for Calvin did believe ...

I can only answer from the Western bias as I fail to comprehend the Eastern thought even when it is explained. Western thought properly includes propitiation and expiation it does not toss one out for the other or put them at competing sides. It does not exclude either. However the Eastern thought seems to be uncomfortable with the propitiation involved in ...

I am not familiar with what modern Lutherans might believe, if any different from Luther, but I am very familiar with what Calvin and Luther thought. They thought the same in many ways but used different lenses. I do not see them at disagreement. They differed in emphasis and detail. Luther emphasized Christ dying for all (which Calvin also believed). ...

As per Roman Catholics, Ministry of High Priest of Jesus is still continuing. CCC 1410: It is Christ himself, the eternal high priest of the New Covenant who, acting through the ministry of the priests, offers the Eucharistic sacrifice. And it is the same Christ, really present under the species of bread and wine, who is the offering of the Eucharistic ...

That is certainly how that is interpreted by a large percentage of Christian groups, and it's how the author of Hebrews interpreted it. Hebrews 10:10 KJV By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. I assume the second part of the question deals with the fact the high priest offers sacrifices for ...

I'm no theologian, and my answer is probably not complete or rigorous by any means. Christ's sacrifice was and remains sufficient to atone for everyone's sin. I don't think limited atonement denies that. It is only efficient for the elect. This is tantamount to saying that the sacrifice could save everybody from any sin, but there are people who won't ...

The real question is: why can't you accept to be loved by your Father? Why would it it would enrage me if your father took punishment for you? You say: "it's completely unfair".Well, yes, it is. But this is the difference between Grace and Law. The Law "convinces you of your sins" and tells you what is not good. The Grace enables you to love. In the old ...