Penal Substitution, Dualism, and Apologetics
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 сен 2024
- Dr. Craig answers questions regarding penal substitution atonement theory, mind-body dualism, and the nature of apologetics.
Special thanks to Courtney Smith for this interview. Be sure to check out her channel, Biblical Apologetics / @biblicalapologetics
For more resources visit: www.reasonable...
We welcome your comments in the Reasonable Faith forums:
www.reasonable...
Be sure to also visit Reasonable Faith's other channel which contains short clips: / drcraigvideos
Follow Reasonable Faith On Twitter: / rfupdates
Like the Reasonable Faith Facebook Fan Page: / reasonablefaithorg
Bro Bill is maybe the number 2 reason I’m a Christian. (After the Holy Spirit of course)
Oh man, I am so intellectually lonely where I am. Hearing Dr Craig talk about this made me feel better. Almost everybody I speak to not only is uninterested, some will criticize. I've just given up the past few years and trying to meet with somebody and talk about theology / philosophy/apologetics.
We probably don't live in the same state (I live in Rhode Island), but I am always talking theology with people and would love to talk to you about it.
@@tylerbrock6047 Thank you brothers, that's very kind of you. I'm in Southern Michigan (for now).
@@rhandley1000 its too bad there is no way to private message people on YT. At least, not that I can see.
Exactly the same. I have spoken with several “churchy” people who bring up a question or subject that I can talk about theology on, and I get excited and I dive into authors and explanations and I just watch their eyes gloss over, and they go into “uh-huh.. interesting” mode and then change the subject… it makes it hard to want to talk about this stuff with the general population..
I love his book Atonement and the Death of Christ! 😊 A solid book that defends the atonement at the deepest intellectual levels.
I recommend “Pierced for our transgressions” a book Dr. Craig quotes a lot in his book. Both are great books.
@@gottschalk4662 Ah yes, that's a great book too! 😊
I love Bill. I do not support or even like PSA. He waters it down such that it loses most of its unique distinctives.
PSA (penal substitutionary atonement) is one crucial part of a full fledged atonement theory. Jesus did take our deserved punishment on the cross, but he also gave a moral example, defeated the forces of evil, and many other atonement theory aspects I would include.
The sacrificial system (which is typological of Jesus) was not only about the animal suffering death in our place, but it did at least include this aspect. There were also thanksgiving, purification, and firstborn sacrifices. My only contention with people is that there is a penal and substitutionary aspect to the atonement, along with a ransom, moral influence, and other aspects.
Btw, penal substitutionary atonement does not require Jesus facing God's wrath, though many do include it. The only thing necessary for a penal substitutionary atonement theory is this:
Jesus died in our place (substitutionary), taking the punishment that sinners deserve (penal), so that forgiveness/reconciliation be offered to everyone to receive by faith (atonement).
Hopefully that helps clarify penal substitutionary atonement.
@@ChristFollower00 I believe your understanding of the sacrificial system has been warped by the reading into it of the PSA doctrine. Where does it say in the scriptures that the animal suffered death in any ones place? How do you explain it when money or flour was given and atonement achieved? Did the money and flour suffer in some ones place? You mention that Jesus was our substitute, again where does the old testament scriptures specifically say this bearing in mind that "Jesus died for the sake of our sins according to the scriptures" 1 Cor 15 :3? PSA is based on the doctrine that God's justice must be satisfied before He can offer forgiveness/reconciliation. Again, where is this anywhere in the Bible? Can He not just be merciful and gracious to forgive/reconcile by faith? After all, this is all throughout the Bible scriptures. One final thought, if this is true - ..even as Christ forgave you, so also you should forgive. (Col 3:13), then if you say that Jesus needed to be punished first before He could forgive us, what does that say for us forgiving others?
@@peterjewoods Good questions. I will look into it more to see if I have any good answers. However, would you actually change your mind if I answered these?
@@peterjewoods spot-on accurate.
@@ChristFollower00 There are many many other scriptural reasons as to why I do not believe the PSA doctrine is valid and they would need to be overcome also.
Since Dr. Craig said Our Lord was a human person, please let me clarify something. Catholics say that Christ is divine person who took on a human numan nature. We don't think Our Lord is a divine person and a human one since that suggests Nestorianism. Nostorianism is the heresy that a divine person and a human on shared Our Lord's body. For Catholics, Christ is one person, adivine one, who became a human being. If he were a divine person and a human one, thee would be a four-person Trinity, But that's a set-contradictiom. It would mean that God is tripersonal and not triipesonal.
In Greek, there's a difference between Hades and Tartaus. Hades is the underworld qhere the dead go. Tartarus is hell. Read Plato's Phaedo, the dialogue about Socrates's death and the immoortality of the soul. In that dialogue, Socrates wants to leave his body because he's eager to talk with other philosophers in the afterlife. Dr. Craig needs to point out some important distinctions.
Sometimes he talks as if he is his soul. But during this video, he distinguishes between himself and his soul. Thomists often agree with with St. Thomas Aquinas. Like St. Thomas, we believe each human person has a human body and a human soul. My body and my soul are parts of me. So I'm neother of them. My soul makes my body a human body. When I die, my immortal soul will leave my body. Then I'll live again when Christ resurrects our bodies when he returns to earth.
Thank you so much for the interview.
Faith in Christ is reasonable!
Craig is always so clear in his explanation
When Paul was refuting philosophy, he was refuting Platonist dualism. Greek philosophers, whose job was to openly debate Greek philosophies, were being converted to Christianity and began to introduce Platonism into the identity of Jesus, the Bible, and ultimately us.
Excellent work ❤
17:15 ...what
Dr Craig is far too kind in calling this merely "absurd" and "bizarre"
I would've gone with something like "lunatic gibbering"