Your posts get farther afield from baptism, while also revealing that you have no desire to dialogue about your initial comments.

You have dodged every question from Josh, and seem incapable of responding to my questions about your words…. You continually mix terms together making your posts incomprehensible and inconsistent.

I get it. You really like “It is finished.” The problem is that you have equated atonement and blood with hanging on a cross, rather than dying, forsaken by the Father. You have collapsed the atonement into Jesus hanging on a cross, before death. Again, I’ll ask: shouldn’t Jesus have asked for help getting off of the cross once he said: “It is finished”?

You comment that the enemy does not like the atonement. It seems that neither do you. You seem to like the cross, but not death, and apparently not the resurrection (you’ve avoided Josh’s repeated questions).

I’ll repeat the two questions that most reveal your confused theology. If redemption is “complete” at the point of “It is finished” then why did he die? And If redemption was not complete, and thus he needed to die, then haven’t you overstated the importance of “It is finished”?

Stop dodging and evading. If the atonement is so important to you, perhaps you’d like to clarify your confusing comments.

I would point out that you and the “young CEOs” have one thing in common though: You both claim that anyone who disagrees with you is the “enemy” and you both seem to think that any criticism of what you say is a personal attack.

It is a tremendous fact to defend: atonement is made always by blood alone. That is well established in both testaments. Propitiation is based on blood (Romans 3:25) always and ONLY (i.e. no torment in hell).

“It is finished”: glorious words! I have never appreciated them as much as I have in defending them. Thank you for bringing a new understanding of their value to me.

There seems to be a concerted effort to attack the atonement, for some reason. Am I surprised? I really shouldn’t be. The enemy hates the blood, the power of the word of the cross. He hates it. He will attack it whenever he can, using whomever he can. If anything can be made to appear to be missing in the work Christ on the cross, then what faith will people have in the gospel? How will they come to believe that it is the blood of Christ that washes away sins?

We were redeemed by the precious blood of Christ (1 Peter 1:19).
Our redemption is through His own blood (Heb 9:12).

I suspect James has had enough of this. We have wandered away from his topic of baptism, and for that I am sorry. I didn’t mean to carry it this far afield.

I turn it back to James to continue on.

His work in poking fun at the young CEO’s is hilarious. Please keep it up! My regards…

In the same post (on Nov 25, at 5:09pm), you state two very interesting points. As far as I can tell you contradict yourself, and I’d like you to explain which position accurately reflects your beliefs.

1. “It was the last thing He said on earth while still in His flesh. He spoke here of the accomplishment of everything necessary for our salvation. He fulfilled the Law. Redemption is completed. We are justified by His blood (Romans 5).”

2. “Tommy, it would be unthinkable to get down from the cross, since His sacrifice as the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world needed to be carried out. When we speak of His blood being shed, we are not referring to a simple paper cut, but we mean His death. Is it necessary to have to explain that??”

Both quotes mention blood. But you seem confused to what blood refers to: suffering, fulfilling the law, death, sacrifice? Regarding #1: If redemption is “complete” at the point of “It is finished” then why did he die?
Regarding #2: If redemption was not complete, and thus he needed to die, then haven’t you overstated the importance of “It is finished”?

Really looking forward to answers, not “guilt by association” evasions. Josh is right. Using the Bible to defend your views is a much simpler plan than citing EW Kenyon. I’ll be glad to stand by my own errors in my theology. The question is where do yours come from? You haven’t cleared up any of the problems with your views.

True or false: if not for the resurrection of Christ, our faith is futile. Can you give a straight answer to that at least?

It’s so important to understand where our beliefs come from. I have explained that “Jesus was tormented in hell” actually came from EW Kenyon. He also popularized the “Jesus died spiritually” error. Both are terrible errors. Neither is scriptural. Neither is supportable by 500 years of solid biblical interpretation.

So, here is the real problem: You either know exactly what I am talking about and are covering it up by throwing insults at me, or you are deeply deceived, being unaware of the source of your beliefs. Either way, you are in serious spiritual trouble.

BTW, prison and hell aren’t the same thing.

All 5 of those statements are distortions. That would make them all classic “strawmen fallacies”.

1. Atonement was indeed completed on the cross.
2. 1 Peter 3:19 uses the word “preached” in KJV, “proclamation” in NASB, “proclaimed” in ESV, “proclaimed” even in the idiotic Message. I stand on what Peter said, that is all I can do. I go no further, or draw no other conclusions.
3. Huh?
4. Huh?
5. Ah! Another clue to your real beliefs. The old “Jesus died spiritually” heresy. Now I see where this is coming from. I thought it was a simple matter. But what you are profiling for us is classic word-faith heresy.

Which theologians do you plumb the depths with? Hagen? Copeland? Hinn? Watch a lot of TBN, do you?

I’m not sure why you feel like you’ve been personally attacked. You’re pretty self-righteous, especially since anyone who doesn’t take your extrapolations from John 19:30 as gospel truth, has junk theology, lol. You might have noticed that most folks on this site, though we disagree on a lot of things, generally argue our positions based on scripture, which is our ultimate authority. The problem with you theory is that it is based on one verse…the one you keep referencing…and you interpretation of that verse is in conflict with numerous other passages pointed out by both me and others. Instead of harmonizing these passages, you keep referencing the same verse and claim that anything in conflict must be poetic. It’s a very dangerous position to take that any scripture that conflicts with your pre-conceived notion of truth must be taken non-literally.

I’m tired of relating the many problems with your theory, especially since I have no reason to think you’ll make any attempt to harmonize the rest of the bible with you contention since you haven’t so far. Suffice it to say that you apparently believe:

1. The resurrection was NOT necessary for us to be saved since atonement was completed the moment (or a moment before) Jesus died in the flesh. This is absolutely in conflict with 1 Cor. 15:17 that says without the resurrection, our faith is futile. Why do you think the Acts believers began meeting on Sundays rather than on Wednesday evening (their Thursday) when Jesus died on the cross?

2. That Jesus went and preached to damned people in hell. Do you believe it’s possible for the damned to be saved? That’s an interesting position.

3. That Jesus isn’t omnipresent, since you apparently believe He cannot simultaneuosly be in paradise with the thief on the cross and in hell at the same time.

4. That Jesus was apparently in hell for three days gloating over someone.

5. Jesus paid the penalty for our sins simply by dying a physical death, even though the penalty for our sins is both a physical and spiritual death in hell.

I don’t want to misstate your beliefs, so please let me know if any of the above are inaccurate.

That is a great question. In short: Yes! I’ll stick with what I have said.

The words “It is finished” are actually only one single word in greek. He used that word also in Luke 12:50, John 19:28, and here in John 19:30. All those references are about the purpose being accomplished by His death on the cross, nothing about anything following in hell.

I do not have the literary skills to expand on the depths found in that last word from the cross. Oh, the depths! Incredible! I can tell you that as soon as Jesus died, the veil of the temple, said to be 4 inches think, was torn in two from top to bottom. NOTHING else was necessary to open the Holy of Holies to us, our access to the throne of grace. No torture remained to be experienced by Jesus. The Lamb was slain, and the blood was presented by our High Priest, and propitiation was made on our behalf. Then, and only then, could the veil have been torn.

When Paul spoke to the Corinthians, he brought Christ, and Him crucified. His message carried the power of God, because it is the cross that is the power of God, not the cross and any supposed punishment in hell. The Cross, and the cross alone.

Yes, Christ went to hell, but NOT to be punished. He went to hell in total VICTORY!

Resurrection is a completely different message. It is a message of new life, after death.

Which is why immersers have so much fun with baptism, and sprinklers have more to explain.