Penal Substitution IS the Gospel

Somebody, it does not matter who, for I have heard this arguent before, posted this as a prelude to a video disputing Penal Substitution Atonement

I have a moral conundrum as well as struggling with the penal substitution theory of atonement. If I can forgive without anyone being punished, how is it that The Creator needs someone to be punished? How do I have a power that my Creator doesn't have?

and I replied:

God requires someone to be punished because transgression against Him is INFINITELY WORSE than any transgression against any of us. For He is God.

In thinking you have a power God does not have, you have lowered God. and definitely exalted yourself.

Who do you think you are???

He has the power to cleanse sin by the forgiving of it. you do not. none of us do. as his forgiveness is more powerful than ours so is his wrath, both in its extent and its intensity as well as its intrinsic moral quality

You have completely forgotten that He is greater than any of us by framing your question as if he were merely a human like us.

Moreover if you object to God punishing someone in your place are you of that kind of tough moral pride whereby you will take your own damnation like a man???.

This quibble of yours is based on your own self righteousness and pride and NOTHING ELSE

Penal substitution is about GOD's NATURE not ours.

If God declares that He requires that the sinner die and then graciously offers that some one else dies in my place or even your place who are you or any of us  to deny this??

Besides, and i will leave you with this,if the hurt from any human's cruelty  is deep enough you can ONLY forgive him by being led to repent of your own unforgiveness, and that requires that someone pay the price for your sins of forgiveness. so in the final analysis it simply is not true that you can forgive anyone without anyone being punished.

And thus it is simply not true that you have a power God does not have. This very notion stems from a  deadly misconception

Have a care!!! penal substitution IS the gospel.

Reject that and damn yourself. but he will lead you to acceptance of it if you are willing to be led to repent.

 . . . and this  on the basis of course that Someone Else paid the price for your self righteousness (and mine for i quibbled about these as well) [

Follow the Science

These days too many people, mostly, it seems Leftists,  think that listening to some talking head of a scientist who speaks from his own authority, is "following the science".

It is no such thing. This is cult religion. Science is observation, but above all it is Skepticism and debate. An expert is only as good as the data and logic he brings to the table and the work he shows. Any scientist who wil not offer this is merely a priest. who reverts to the fallacy of appeal to authority Censoring opposing voices, and there is no consensus on covid anymore than on global warming, violates science itself Anyone who does not see these things, and our politicians are especially to blame here, does not know what science is. But then as the education systems of the West rot away into a vile morass of political correctness and "woke" this is alas to be expected Some scientists have already been bought and paid for - the shills cowards and priests who appeal to their own authority to preach covid mania But some , albeit precious few, have not

By all means follow the science, but do not, I beg you, be fooled by propaganda pumped out by power seeking governments by scientific illiterates to ignorant masses

C. S. Lewis: Heretic

C. S. Lewis intended his Narnia stories to be vehicles of christian teaching 

I  contend that the result is something quit conteary

The Narnia stories contain such howlers that if they are reflective of Lewis' mind, he was a heretic.

Aslan may be sacrificed himself to placate the awrath of the White Witch, (a Satan figure) But Jesus did NOT!!. He died to placate the wrath of God the Father. There really is a difference!! In the Silver Chair the children under the earth were being seduced to deny there was an over world - a brilliant analogy to materialist atheists on earth saying there is no heaven. but what did they say to the Green Lady? "you may very well be right. But it is better to believe in an overworld than not" REALLY??????? how could it be that the Green Lady might very well be right?? she was wrong and the children knew this for they had experienced the overworld was Lewis still such a repressed atheist that he really thought that atheist arguments might after all very well be righnt??? What faith is this?? Then Lewis has Puddleglum self inflict pain to wake himself up Severe treatment of the body is no valiue against [sin]. This is a bible quote. Lewis totally twists his own idea of the nature of pain as a megaphone given by God to wake us from our slumbers. Self inflction was never a part of the Biblical truth of it. But in this story here it is But the very worst blasphemy was in the Final Battle. All of Narnia followed a false composite God made up ot Tash the demon God of the Calomenes and Aslan the True God. It was called Tashlan So far so good. But at the end of thefinal battle who should appear in heaven but a devout worshipper of the demon God Tash?? he had never compromised his faith by worshipping the composite so he was saved. this is rank heresy. In the Bible it is totally clear you are saved by Jesus alone, not by your own faithfulness to any other religion If you enjoy his ficiton that is fine. but if you seek to get your christian theology from Lewis this would be a suicidal mistake Now I am not one of those superstitious persons who reject Lewis because he wrote stories with mythical beings and witches in them. But in his endeavour to make his stories vehicles of christian teching ( a good idea in and of itself, I warrant) he botched it horribly.

I find grievous error in other of his writings and may write on them if I think it worth the effort

He was a WHAAAAAT????

The trouble is, though these days I find rightist speakers making sense where leftists do not, Dennis  Prager  of Prager U made a complete fool of himself by insisting that Hitler was not a nationalist. Prager said he was an imperialist as if these two were diametrically opposed. This is manifest nonsense.

Anyone listening to any of Hitler's speeches will most likely hear the term "Deutschland" at least once per paragraph.

Prager's thinking is that crude binary he might condemn when seen in Leftists, namely that in his case he thinks nationalism is a rightist cause therefore it is only ever good. Therefore, he thinks nationalists do not kill their own people (ever heard of treason trials and their invariable sentence?) and never oppress them (ever heard of the Russian Tsarist motto "Autocracy Orthodoxy Nationalism?)

Prager admits to no possibility of abuse of nationalism, which abuse even has a name: Chauvinism, after one Nicholas Chauvin a French revolutionary officer who was a total one eyed (ie my nation, part or faction, is never wrong) French Patriot fanatic.

Why do i mention this clown Prager? Because Candace Owens, a first class mind I respect greatly  may have  drunk this koolade.

Because everything can be abused and is abused evil is everywhere, not as Prager and his ilk put it most conveniently, only ever on the Leftist side.

He is a lightweight and a clown and Candace has sold out her first class mind by associating with someone believing this nonsense.

And he adds blasphemy to the mix by identifying Biblical righteousness and morality to Conservatism

This cannot be the case when the Bible routinely condemns the sins BOTH factions are given to, even, given that he is a Jew, when one confines ones scriptural basis to the Old Testament

But Ms Owens is young.  She might mature a little more (though I grant she is more mature than any leftist her age) and actually read some more  real history .

I am no leftist, but if Prager represents the only political alternative to it then I am no Rightist either and will become apolitical  andconclude that I must

 . . .let the dead quarrel with the dead as to how the dead shall live

Thoughts 3

 The Internet is the most powerful research tool in history.

The Internet is also the most powerful means of surveillance and control in history.

So it is clear that one of these has to give way for the elites cannot have or tolerate an informed citizenry, even though most of the people prefer to post selfies or virtue signal.

So if the elites require that they remove access to one of these from the masses it takes no great effort to guess which,

for alas the Internet is also the most powerful  means of entertainment and distraction of said masses there has ever been.

Who are the heretics?

There  is much talk about false teachers in the church, and indeed there are false teachers in the Church.

But I submit that the direction of this talk about false teachers, being always directed to the other fellow, is simply wrong

If we are carnal of fruit we will be carnal of mind, so if we are honest we will all be false teachers if we dare to teach.

The only way carnal minded people like us ever preach truth is dishonestly, as hypocrites who have committed ourselves to  sound  doctrine and think that is the same as believing it.

Be  assured it is not. Commitment to truth  as dead letter proposition is  the hallmark of the Pharisees

What we really believe is what comes out in our careless words and spontaneous actions

When we pay attention to that biblical  fact - if you know the Bible you know this is so - we don't look so good any more.

IOW I am still a heretic for I am carnal. And being carnal I regard the things of God as absurd. And this the Holy Spirit is convicting me of as sin that I may repent and so be transformed by the renewal of my mind

If you  honestly believe sound doctrine you will radiate the fruit of the spirit for you will have been transformed by the genuine renewing of your mind, and that from glory to glory. thus i continue to seek Him that he continue to lead me to repentance of sin, including those sins of thought for as a man thinks in his heart so he is

That is why Jesus' saying you know them by their fruit - is so important

Thoughts 2

 A government, ANY government, that opposes freedom of speech

opposes freedom of thought

opposes honesty of thought

OPPOSES THOUGHT ITSELF

What they want is a docile amd mindless populace chanting slogans as selected by the government.

What???  They want us to love one another, so will punish those they thihk committing hate and thought crimes?

Well, they certainly cannot lead by example

Think about it, while you are allowed to

Thoughts

 

These shall be brief as i lack the inclination to write a long post.

just a thought, maybe tehfirst of some, at least.

It is said that for evil to triumph all that is needed is for good men to do nothing.

My first answer is a retort:  if I ever meet a good person (and i hvae been looking for over 40 years now) then I will rebuke him sternly, kick his backside and tell him to get busy  and fight that evil that will otherwise triumph

For the plain biblical fact is that there are none righteous. No person is good, as when Jesus said "why do you call me good there is none good but God." Matthew 19:17 but also repeated in Mark and Luke

It might be rejoined that this does not apply to spiritual people, those trransformed by the Holy Spirit in one on one relationship.

But the fact is I have met none of those either in my now 43 years a christian.

And even if i did I am not convinced he would be involved in politics, for His Kingdom is not of this world, for if it were of this world His people (us) would be fighting for it [by worldly means]

Equally plain is that evil most assuredly will triumph, that is until the very end, after the christians have been massacred, at the Second Coming when he wil destroy the wicked.

Then, and not before, and by His own hand not the agency of men

if the eye offends rip it out??

 

This is one of the most heretical doctrines  have ever heard

https://www.bitchute.com/video/LJypqzWseQLd/

in it the speaker claims that the teaching of Jesus "if your eye offends you gouge it out" is to be taken literally

This idea  is  rank heresy  and I propose to demonstrate from the logic of scripture that this is so

 So why is it heretical?  Because it is taken out of overall biblical context.   Colossans 2:23 severe treatment - ie cutting off limbs and and eyes - is of no value against carnal indulgence So what was Jesus saying? He was makling hyperbole. 

This is a literary exaggeration to make a point , and Hebrew prose is full of it

How do we know this? If we take this passage literally it contradicts Colossans 2:23. and we all know the Bible does not contradict itself.

What was Jesus saying then? That we should be led to radical repentance, but this only by His grace, in ihis gentleness and not forgetting that His yoke is easy his burden is light.

So any  falling for thisw perniucious doctrine here are literally mutilating yourself and you think His yoke is easy?? Come now!!

Another example of hyperbole is "unless you hate your father rmother etc you are not worhy of me" Luke 14:26.

Why is this hyperbole? Because we are commanded to honour and love our parents. the point of this is that our love for Him should be first and greatest so that the others my be likened to hate - but only comparitively - to this. It is a commandment to have a love greater than all the others, namely loving Him firt and foremost. It is not  a commandment to hate anyone, for such violates the Law  of God

 Another example of hyperbole is  "strain our a gnat and swallow a camel."  Must i point out that nobody ever swallowed a camel? it was a colourful exaggeration to make a point, ie hyperbole. In this instance Jesus wasw saying that the Pharisees dealt with trivial details of the LAw of God  and totally missed the  essntially point. The person who made this video is grossly ignorant of   Hebrew style, is a legalist and so grossly misinterprets the key passage here as to be rankly heretical. He  also totally ignores the inward nature of sin. Self harm does not change the inner impulse.  He is a fool and is misleading people in the most dangerous fashion; and this video shows what nonsense legalism coupled with naive literalism with no regard for context or hebrew style can lead to - rather like poor Origen castrating himself in fact the maker of this video Is not of God, totaly denying the grace of God and so damning all to hell who believe him unless they seek the Spirit who is infintely kinder than the fanatic who made this video