Steve Gregg on Atonement

Post by **_STEVE7150** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 4:08 pm

Steve 7150, please don't dignify that enemy of our souls by suggesting that a price had to be paid to him, in order for Jesus to save us from sin.

I think the price was paid to God as a just payment, because Satan would have refused payment, but as far as i see Satan has some type of legal authority over mankind.
Since Jesus purchased us , that means we were previously owned by someone else. Jesus and Paul both called Satan the Ruler of this world and ruler's usually have subjects. A ruler owns his subjects until he sells them or someone else takes them. Jesus TOOK believers with him. But as to unbelievers, who is their father?
"You are of your father the devil and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him." John 8.44

Certainly any power that Satan has is because either God allows it or God actually created it for a greater good beyond the events of just this age.

Post by **__id_1941** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 4:27 pm

STEVE7150 wrote:Steve 7150, please don't dignify that enemy of our souls by suggesting that a price had to be paid to him, in order for Jesus to save us from sin.

I think the price was paid to God as a just payment, because Satan would have refused payment, but as far as i see Satan has some type of legal authority over mankind.
Since Jesus purchased us , that means we were previously owned by someone else. Jesus and Paul both called Satan the Ruler of this world and ruler's usually have subjects. A ruler owns his subjects until he sells them or someone else takes them. Jesus TOOK believers with him. But as to unbelievers, who is their father?
"You are of your father the devil and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him." John 8.44

Certainly any power that Satan has is because either God allows it or God actually created it for a greater good beyond the events of just this age.

Steve,

The wages of sin is death, That is not satan's rule or satan's law it is God's law. Satan is the accuser. The penalty due us for breaking God's law is death. Christ paid that debt and redeemed us from the curse of the law.

Post by **_STEVE7150** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 5:06 pm

The wages of sin is death, That is not satan's rule or satan's law it is God's law. Satan is the accuser. The penalty due us for breaking God's law is death. Christ paid that debt and redeemed us from the curse of the law

Yes this is true but the bible also says Jesus "came to destroy the works of the devil." How did Jesus do this?
"Now the ruler of this world will be cast out" John 12.31 These are Jesus's own words referring to his crucifixion and what it would accomplish.
Who is the ruler of this world, who is being cast out and from where? Are our sins the ruler of this world?

Post by **__id_1941** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 9:48 pm

STEVE7150 wrote:The wages of sin is death, That is not satan's rule or satan's law it is God's law. Satan is the accuser. The penalty due us for breaking God's law is death. Christ paid that debt and redeemed us from the curse of the law

Yes this is true but the bible also says Jesus "came to destroy the works of the devil." How did Jesus do this?
"Now the ruler of this world will be cast out" John 12.31 These are Jesus's own words referring to his crucifixion and what it would accomplish.
Who is the ruler of this world, who is being cast out and from where? Are our sins the ruler of this world?

The "works of the devil" are spiritual darkness and deception. by which he deceived the nations. But Christ is the light of the world and His death and resurrection brought forth the New Covenant in which God indwells His people and the light has invaded the darkness.

1Jn 2:8 Again, a new commandment I write to you, which thing is true in Him and in you, because the darkness is passing away, and the true light is already shining.

Post by **__id_1679** » Thu Jun 14, 2007 10:38 am

Paidion,

A question about your quote to Steve:

Steve 7150, please don't dignify that enemy of our souls by suggesting that a price had to be paid to him, in order for Jesus to save us from sin.

He thought he was the greatest. In his self-aggrandization, presumed that all the kingdoms of the world were his to give ---- wanted to be like God Himself, and yet be independant from Him. NOPE. Satan didn't own the people of the world, either. That also is his delusion, and he'd like to get everyone to believe he did so that he could steal a bit more of the glory that belongs to God alone. No price had to be paid to the devil! And none was.

In the light of Luke 4:4-8, How then can Satan offer these kingdoms in exchange for Jesus' worship if in fact they were not his to give? Was the whole thing merely a charade? Of particular note, Jesus didn't rebuke Satan for his offer of the kingdoms, but for the demand of worshipping him.
The other problem this exchange seems to pose is that we have Satan, a limited created being of God, offering to God the Son the very things that
are inheirntly His to begin with. How do you reconcile this apparent conundrum if the temptation of Christ had any real substance?

Peace in Him,
Bob

Post by **_STEVE7150** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 11:44 am

In the light of Luke 4:4-8, How then can Satan offer these kingdoms in exchange for Jesus' worship if in fact they were not his to give? Was the whole thing merely a charade? Of particular note, Jesus didn't rebuke Satan for his offer of the kingdoms, but for the demand of worshipping him.
The other problem this exchange seems to pose is that we have Satan, a limited created being of God, offering to God the Son the very things that
are inheirntly His to begin with. How do you reconcile this apparent conundrum if the temptation of Christ had any real substance?

Traveler, you're right because the point of Satan's offer is that it was a real temptation because both Jesus and Paul called Satan "the ruler of this world" and Paul said he is the "god of this age who blinds the minds of unbelievers." Yet Satan acknowledged that the kingdom of the world WAS GIVEN to him. Clearly God gave it to him for a reason, so ultimately there is a benefit to being delivered from evil.

Post by **_Paidion** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 1:17 pm

In the light of Luke 4:4-8, How then can Satan offer these kingdoms in exchange for Jesus' worship if in fact they were not his to give? Was the whole thing merely a charade? Of particular note, Jesus didn't rebuke Satan for his offer of the kingdoms, but for the demand of worshipping him.

Satan in his arrogance, had convinced himself that these kingdoms were his to give. He stated that they were "handed over" to him, and that he could give them to whomever he wished. Where is it written that the kingdoms of the world were handed over to Satan? I once heard about a deluded person who thought he owned Buckingham Palace, and subsequently offered to sell it to someone.

I think Jesus didn't rebuke Satan for his offer of the kingdoms because of the principle "He that is deluded, let him be deluded still." Also, I am not sure that Jesus rebuked Satan for the demand of worshipping him. I think He simply pointed out that it is written that one is to worship the Lord (Yahweh) God, and to minister only to Him... I suppose that could be interpreted to be a rebuke.

The other problem this exchange seems to pose is that we have Satan, a limited created being of God, offering to God the Son the very things that are inheirntly His to begin with. How do you reconcile this apparent conundrum if the temptation of Christ had any real substance?

I reconcile it in the way described above ---- the delusion of Satan. As you say, they were inherently God's, but Satan was so self-deceived that he thought they were his to offer. It is possible that Jesus believed they were Satan's to offer, and that therefore it was truly a temptation. He was not omniscient, at least while He lived as a human being here on earth.

Steve:

Paul said he is the "god of this age who blinds the minds of unbelievers.

Did Paul say that Satan is "the god of this age who blinds the minds of unbelievers"? Or do you presume that Paul was speaking of Satan because you have heard it said so many times?

Sometimes there is a misplaced phrase in Paul's writings. Irenaeus said that Paul "frequently uses a transposed order in his sentences, due to the rapidity of his discourses and the impetus of the Spirit which is in him."

Irenaeus said that Paul was speaking not of some "god of this age", but of GOD HIMSELF. He said that the verse should be read as follows:

In whom God, has blinded the minds of the unbelievers of this age to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the likeness of God.

This seems to be in harmony with Christ's practice where he spoke in parables so that "hearing they might hear and not understand, and seeing they might see and not perceive."

Irenaeus pointed out another place (II Thessalonians 2:8,9) in which Paul did this:

And then shall be revealed that wicked one whom the Lord Jesus shall slay with the spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the presence of his coming, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power, and signs, and lying wonders.

Again there is a misplaced phrase. According to the order of the words it appears that Christ's coming is after the working of Satan.

Irenaeus indicated that the words should have been in the following order:

And then shall be revealed that wicked one, whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all power, and signs, and lying wonders, whom the Lord Jesus shall slay with the spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the presence of His coming.

Post by **__id_1679** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 10:57 pm

Hi Paidion,

Thanks for the reply.

Quote: " I reconcile it in the way described above ---- the delusion of Satan. As you say, they were inherently God's, but Satan was so self-deceived that he thought they were his to offer."

I sort of had the same thought. But it doesn't help. You have one problem with the issue of the temptation being legitimate and another that implies a problem with Jesus' deity. Didn't Satan know who Jesus was? Here we have the Creator (Logos) being offered the Kingdom by the created being. Is he not subject to God? Was Jesus playing a "cloak and dagger"
game with his identity to the degree that Satan didn't really know who he was?
Thoughts? I've often wondered if this is one of those issues in the Bible better left alone!

Peace in Him
Bob

Post by **__id_1679** » Sat Jun 16, 2007 11:23 pm

Hi Steve,

Quote: "Clearly God gave it to him for a reason, so ultimately there is a benefit to being delivered from evil".

Perhaps. Maybe a better angle would be that God gave it over to Satan for a "season" to suit His purposes. God allows evil for a reason. "No pain, no gain"...? Consider the opening chapters of Job and this dialogue between Satan and God. Sounds as if there was a "wager" being placed
regarding Job's motives for serving God. Of course Satan is proved a liar
as Job maintained his faith in God. Is something like that going on between God, us and Satan? What do you think?

Peace in Him,
Bob

Post by **_Paidion** » Sun Jun 17, 2007 8:30 am

Greetings Traveler,

You wrote:

I sort of had the same thought. But it doesn't help. You have one problem with the issue of the temptation being legitimate and another that implies a problem with Jesus' deity.

Please explain why I still have a problem with the issue of the temptation, even with my explanation.

Also, I would like you to spell out for me the "other that implies a problem with Jesus' deity". I am not sure we understand Jesus' deity in the same way.

Didn't Satan know who Jesus was? Here we have the Creator (Logos) being offered the Kingdom by the created being. Is he not subject to God? Was Jesus playing a "cloak and dagger" game with his identity to the degree that Satan didn't really know who he was?

It is not clear to me whether these questions are a clarification as to my two "problems" or not. I will simply answer your questions as I understand them.

I think Satan did know that Jesus was the Son of God. That's why he was trying to tempt Him. Satan thought that if he could get the very Son of God to disobey His Father, then he had really won.

No, Satan is not subject to God. He is a total rebel. God will allow him to go only so far, of course. And no, Jesus was not trying to conceal his identity. Satan knew full well who he was. Satan understood free will, and the possibility that Jesus could have gone along with his suggestions.