Towns, Elmer. Theology for Today. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Group, 2002.Theology Applied: A Living Faith by Etzel & Gutierrez: chs. 16–20 Core Christianity by Elmer Towns: chs. 4, 6The attached documents describe how to write the paper, the format it needs to follow. I have also attached some reading material for reference due to the theological and Biblical foundations that need to be expressed. The Application Paper Template attachment shows how the paper should be written as well the instructions tells you to.
application_paper_instructions.doc
application_paper_template.docx
application_paper_topics.docx
week_4_the_death_of_christ.pdf
week1_tft_2the_deity_of_christ.pdf
Unformatted Attachment Preview
THEO 104
APPLICATION PAPER INSTRUCTIONS
For this assignment, you must compose a 3-page double-spaced paper that addresses how the
principles that you have learned throughout this course can be applied to your understanding of
what it means to be a Christian. You will submit your paper by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Monday of
Module/Week 7.
NOTE: You must choose a topic from the list of approved topics (see the “Application Paper
Topics” document).
As you respond to the prompt, reflect on the concepts that you have learned throughout the
course, and apply them to your specific topic. Be sure to integrate the information that you
learned through the textbook readings, the assigned article readings, the lecture videos, and any
other related content that you may have encountered during the course. Your paper must also:
1. Describe the course concepts that are related to your topic, demonstrating your reflection
and analysis. Do not simply summarize what was presented in the course.
2. Demonstrate real ownership of the ideas that you present by providing unique insight as
evidence of your careful consideration of the topic.
3. Provide a logical link between the description of the concepts from the course and the
conclusions or implications that you draw in your reflection. In other words, your
conclusion should be logically derived from the application of the course concepts to the
description of your topic.
4. Demonstrate learning initiative by exploring conclusions and implications beyond the
boundaries of your classroom discussion.
5. Focus on depth of understanding, rather than breadth of coverage.
Format your paper in a Microsoft Word document using current APA, MLA, or Turabian style
(whichever corresponds to your degree program). Review the Application Paper Grading Rubric
to see the specific grading criteria by which you will be evaluated before submitting your paper.
Structure your paper in the following format (See the “Application Paper Template” document):
I. Introduction (1 paragraph introducing the 2 topics/doctrines that you will address)
II. Part One (first topic: approximately 1 page)
a. Theological Definition
b. Biblical Foundation
c. Practical Application
III. Part Two (second topic: approximately 1 page)
a. Theological Definition
b. Biblical Foundation
c. Practical Application
IV. Conclusion (1 paragraph summarizing your areas of progression in Christian thought)
THEO 104
APPLICATION PAPER TEMPLATE
As an example of the paper template, if writing on the topic of Angels and Demons, the paper
should be structured as follows:
Introduction
Angels
Theological Definition: Angels
Biblical Foundation: Angels
Practical Application: Angels
Demons
Theological Definition: Demons
Biblical Foundation: Demons
Practical Application: Demons
Conclusion
THEO 104
APPLICATION PAPER TOPICS
You must choose from the approved list below:
1. Angels and Demons
2. Arminianism and Calvinism
3. Assurance of Salvation and Doubt
4. Baptism of Holy Spirit and Spiritual Gifts
5. Conscience and Wisdom
6. Conversion and Reconciliation
7. Death and Judgment Seat of Christ
8. Death of Christ and Deity of Christ
9. Election and Predestination
10. Eternal Security and Sealing of Holy Spirit
11. Fall of Man and Temptation
12. Glory of God and Worship
13. Gospel and Sin nature
14. Grace and Mercy
15. Holiness and Love
16. Hope and Prayer
17. Justice and Law
18. Tribulation and Millennium
19. Ministry Calling and Pastor
20. Miracles and Prophecy
21. Nature of God and Trinity
22. Peace of God and Power of God
23. Preservation of Scripture and Reliability of Scripture
24. Presumptuous Sins and Sins of Ignorance
25. Rapture and Tribulation
26. Righteousness and Substitution
27. Satan and Savior
28. Sins of Commission and Sins of Omission
29. Slave of Christ and Union with Christ
XI. THE DEATH OF CHRIST
One of the greatest questions of the ages involves the death of the Son of God who was love incarnate.
How could anyone desire to murder Him, or even to harm Him? Was He not the Creator of all humanity and
the personification of goodness to everyone? Yet He was tortured and killed. The symbolic hatred of
mankind was vented against Him.
The early apostles seem to be guilt-ridden over their responsibility for His death. After all, Peter had
denied Christ and with the others had fled. One of their own, Judas, had betrayed Him to the enemy. When
assessing responsibility for Christ’s death, who was responsible?
A. THE FATHER WAS RESPONSIBLE. (Isa. 53:6; 53:10; Psa. 22:15; 2 Cor. 5:21; Acts 2:28; Rom. 3:25; 1 John
4:10.) All of the above Scriptures evidence the fact that God the Father was actively involved in the death of
Christ. The Father “laid on Him the iniquity of us all” and exacted upon Him the penalty for such iniquity.
God was “pleased” to bruise Christ as an offering for our sins. Only the Father could have the authority to
accept and command (decree) the substitutionary work of Christ’s being made to be sin for us (2 Cor. 5:21).
Before any Roman soldier ever touched the body of our Lord, He had already been “delivered by the
determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God.” Indeed, He is “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the
world,” the propitiation for our sins set forth by God the Father. “It is quite alien to biblical thought to
overlook the agency of God the Father in the provisions of redemption and it is perversion to represent the
Father as won over to the exercise of grace and mercy by the intervention of Christ’s propitiatory
accomplishment.” i
B. THE SON WAS RESPONSIBLE. (John 10:17-18; Gal. 2:20; Matt. 20:28; Heb. 9:14-15; 1 Tim. 2:5-6.) Jesus
foretold His death in John 10:17-18, where He clearly stated that no man could take His life, but rather he
Himself would lay it down, knowing that He also had “power to take it again.” In teaching His disciples the
value of willing servitude, Jesus referred to the purpose of His earthly ministry as being “to minister, and to
give His life a ransom for many.” Paul speaks of Christ as the One “who gave Himself a ransom for all” (1
Tim. 2:6), and also as the One “who loved me and gave Himself for me” (Gal. 2:20). The giving of Christ’s
self refers not merely to His life of humble, willing service to others, but to His giving His life to provide for
man’s salvation. The evidence of Christ’s willingness to die for us is further substantiated by Hebrews 9:1415, where the Savior is presented as both the High Priest and the Holy Sacrifice who offered Himself (His
life) to God on our behalf.
C. HUMAN RESPONSIBILITY. (Acts 4:27-28.) Although Christ’s death was decreed by the Father and
accomplished by the Son, it was also implemented by the hands of mortal men. In Acts 4:27-28 the death of
Christ is partially attributed to “Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel.” Luke
23:6-12 gives the account of Herod’s involvement. Matthew 27:11-26 and John 18:28-19:16 narrate both
Pilate’s interrogations and the sentencing of Jesus to the cross. The conspiracy and wicked intent of the
Jewish leaders to put Christ to death is exposed in Matthew 26:57-68. Matthew also records the treacherous
bargain of Judas Iscariot (26:14-16), his betraying kiss (26:47-50), and his suicide that resulted from his guilt
(27:3-10).
D. SATANIC RESPONSIBILITY. The instigator of enmity against Christ is Satan. John explicitly records that
Satan entered into Judas at the Last Supper (John 13:27). The fact that Satan has long sought the destruction
and overthrow of Christ is verified through Scripture (Isa. 14:12-15; Rev. 12:7-9; Col. 2:15; Eph. 6:12). The
first recorded promises of our Savior’s triumph (Gen. 3:15) includes a prophecy of Satan’s involvement in
Christ’s death.
In one sense, every person who is born will ultimately die, but the birth of Christ was different from other
men for many reasons, primarily because Christ came into the world for a purposeful, predicted and
productive death. His death was not simply the termination of His life, because His death was purposefully
for others; because His death was predictive, for Christ was the Lamb slain before the foundation of the earth;
and because His death was productive in bringing eternal life to many. Just as the life of Jesus Christ changed
mankind, so His death changed the makeup of eternity and Heaven.
In modern life, a medical officer usually includes the cause or reasons for death on a death certificate.
Sometimes it is due to disease, accident, murder, suicide or just natural causes. Christ suffered a violent death,
with several contributors or causal factors that brought on His sufferings and demise.
D. PURPOSE OF CHRIST’S DEATH. There are many reasons for the death of Christ. It is true that Christ’s death
was a result of His loyalty to what He believed; it was an expression of God’s love, and it removed the stain
from God’s honor, that is, it demonstrated the righteousness, holiness and justice of God. These are but partial
explanations of Christ’s death and secondary insignificance in comparison with the main idea of His death.
This section shall deal with the meaning and extent of the atonement of Christ.
In discussing the purpose of Christ’s death, there are at least 11 reasons accomplishments.
Eleven Results/Accomplishments of the Death of Christ
1.
The substitutionary work of Christ
2.
Redemption by blood
3.
Propitiation
4.
The demands of the law are satisfied
5.
Reconciliation
6.
Judgment of the sin nature
7.
Basis for daily cleansing
8.
The basis of forgiving sins committed before the Cross
9.
The basis of the national salvation of Israel
10.
Judging Satan
11.
The purification of things in heaven
1. The substitutionary work of Christ. The substitutionary work of Christ involves the fact that Christ is
a substitute for sin and explores the heart of the text declaring the meaning of Christ’s death—“When Thou
shalt make His soul an offering for sin” (Isa. 53:10).
Included in the substitutionary work of Christ is the vicarious nature of His death. Hodge notes,
“Vicarious suffering is suffering endured by one person in the stead of another,” i.e., in his place. It
necessarily supposes the exemption of the party in whose place the suffering is endured. A vicar is a
substitute, one who takes the place of another and acts in his stead. ii Since Christ was without sin, it is evident
that He did not die for His own sin (John 8:46; 1 Pet. 2:22; Heb. 4:15). Christ died for the sins of others: He
died in our place.
a. Isa. 53:6: “Jehovah . . . laid on him the iniquity of us all.”
b. 1 Cor. 15:3: “Christ died for our sins” (cf. Rom. 5:8; 2 Cor. 5:21).
c. 1 Pet. 2:24: “who His own self bore our sins in His own body” (cf. 1 Pet. 3:18).
d. Mark 10:45; John 10:11: “layeth down his life for the sheep.”
e. Exod. 12; 1 Cor. 5:7: the true passover Lamb.
f. Isa. 53:10: the true sin offering (cf. Lev. 6:24-30; Heb. 10:1-4).
It is overwhelmingly evident that Christ died in our stead. There are, however, some objections to this
interpretation.
The first objection to the idea of a substitutionary atonement is a lexical objection. This objection is
based on the usage of two prepositions found in the Greek: anti and huper. The argument is that anti can
only be translated “instead of.” The second preposition, huper, is nearly always used when the sufferings and
death of Christ are the subject. Huper means “in behalf of,” “with a view to the benefit of.” Anti is used as
“instead of” (Matt. 5:28; 20:28; Mark 10:45; Luke 11:11; Rom. 12:17; 1 Thess. 5:15; 1 Pet. 3:9; and Heb.
12:16).
The first objection differentiates between huper and anti. Its purpose is to explain away Christ’s
substitutionary work. Shedd has exposed the error of such a lexical objection by pointing out that the two
words are often used with the same purpose. “The preposition , [huper], like the English preposition “for,”
has two significations. It may denote advantage or benefit, or it may mean substitution. . . . The sense of
“for” in these two prepositions must be determined by the context, and the different circumstances in each
instance.” iii
The following Scriptures also show that huper is equivalent to anti; (Rom. 13; 2 Cor. 5:14; John 10:11,
15).
Another enlightening dimension of the usage of the prepositions huper and anti is discussed by Shedd as
he notes:
The latter preposition [anti] excludes the idea of benefit or advantage, and specifies only the idea of
substitution. The former [huper] may include both ideas. Whenever, therefore, the sacred writer
would express both together and at once, he selects the preposition , [huper]. In so doing, he
teaches both that Christ died in the sinner’s place, and for the sinner’s benefit. iv
In several Scriptures a usage of huper occurs regarding Christ’s death in our behalf: 1 Corinthians 15:3;
Galatians 2:20; John 10:11,15; Titus 2:14; Galatians 3:13; Romans 5:8; and 2 Corinthians 5:21.
Apart from the refuted “lexical” objections, the major objection to the substitutionary death of Christ is
that it is immoral for God to punish an innocent one, i.e., Christ. This “moral” objection errs severely in
assuming that God and Christ are two beings as different from each other as two individual men. Such an
objection fails to realize that Christ died, not of compulsion, but voluntarily (John 10:17,18; Matt. 20:28; Gal.
2:20). It is not immoral for the judge to pay the penalty Himself—if He chooses.
Another slightly different, moral objection says that satisfaction and forgiveness are mutually exclusive.
This objection holds that if a substitute pays the debt that we owe, God cannot collect the debt for us also, but
He is morally bound to let us go free; that is, on this theory, God does not exercise mercy in forgiving us, but
merely does His duty.
The primary error of this second “moral” objection is that it overlooked the fact that the one who pays the
debt is not a third party, but the Judge Himself. Forgiveness is, therefore, still optional with Him and may be
offered upon terms agreeable to Himself. As Dr. D. James Kennedy once preached, “We shall be judged by
the ‘hanging judge,’ that is, the Judge who Himself hanged upon a tree to pay the penalty for our offenses.”
On the cross of Calvary, God placed our sin upon Christ and accepted Him in our place as He provided for our
atonement. “For He hath made Him to be sin for us, Who knew no sin, that we might be made the
righteousness of God in Him” (2 Cor. 5:21). Paul reminded the Romans “that, while we were yet sinners,
Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). The Bible teaches that Christ was the Christians’ willing substitute at Calvary.
Twenty-one verses say Christ died for us. Even though one verse should be enough to convince, when
looking at them all, there can be no doubt about the substitutionary nature of Christ’s death: (1. Matt. 20:28;
2. Luke 22:6, 20; 3. John 6:51; 4. John 10:11; 5. John 10:15; 6. John 10:18; 7. John 15:12; 8. John 15:13; 9.
Rom. 5:6-8; 10. Rom. 8:32; 11. 2 Cor. 5:14; 12. 2 Cor. 5:21; 13. Gal. 2:20; 14. Gal. 3:13; 15. Eph. 5:2; 16.
Eph. 5:25; 17. 1 Thess. 5:9,10; 18. 1Tim. 2:5-6; 19. Titus 2:13-14; Heb. 2:4; 20. 1 Pet. 3:18; 21. 1 John 3:16).
2. Redemption by blood. Since the law is eternal, unchangeable and applicable to every man, no man can
escape the demands of the law. Since a degree of criminality is attached to every violation of the law and God
will punish according to the degree of criminality (Luke 10:10-15; 12:47-48), every violation of the law will
be punished according to a predetermined standard. Since every man has violated the law and will suffer its
consequences, then there is no hope for those who have violated the law. Nothing in man can help him escape
the criminality of his actions. Nor can God treat the violation as if it never occurred, neither can God forgive
any violation arbitrarily. Since the law was an extension of the Person of God, then breaking the law is
offending God, and God must be compensated before the person is saved.
God has two opposing, yet eternal, desires within His nature. First, God wants to let man go free, hence,
God is satisfying His desire to be good or loving. On the other hand, God must punish every violation of a
crime to the degree of its criminality, to satisfy His justice. Both desires in God were satisfied when He found
another person to suffer the punishment of criminality, allowing man to go free (Gen. 22:8). To carry out this
transaction, God’s Son, Jesus Christ, satisfied man’s violation of God’s law. Christ was born without sin,
lived a perfect life, neither breaking the Law or deserving its criminality. Christ took upon Himself
criminality that had been accumulated by every man. Christ suffered in the place of man. Since punishment
must be eternal and complete, Christ suffered ultimately for all criminality. This act, called the vicarious
substitutionary atonement, means that Christ suffered in the place of the sinner (vicarious), and the death of
Christ was both the substitute for our sin and the satisfaction of the law.
The symbol of this transaction was the actual blood of Jesus Christ which is a symbol of His
substitutionary death. “It is shed blood which has always been required for deliverance, and thus it was in the
type and the antitype, Christ in His crucifixion.” v Yet, the symbol of the blood was not introduced at the time
of the cross of Jesus Christ. It goes back into the pages of the Old Testament.
The truth of God’s requiring a blood sacrifice as the righteous ground for the remission of sin was
established beyond all dispute in Old Testament times . . . from Abel’s lamb to the day of Christ’s
death, is the only interpretation which fully and rightly construes all that the Bible presents on this its
central theme of salvation. vi
When Adam and Eve sinned, the Bible says, “And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew
that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons” (Gen. 3:7). Adam
and Eve experienced guilt that came from breaking the law of God. God did not punish them on the spot, for
that would mean eternal death and separation from God. God knew that one day His Son would die for all
men, including Adam and Eve. “The Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Rev. 13:8). Peter also
tells us that the symbolic price of this transaction was “with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without
blemish and without spot” (1 Pet. 1:19). Therefore, God chose an animal, most likely a sheep, for later God’s
Son would be called the “Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). Although the
account in the Garden of Eden does not include the word blood, the skins of the animals were given as a
symbolic covering for their nakedness (Gen. 3:21). Because of their criminality, they deserved the wrath of
God. Yet, they watched God put to death an animal, shedding innocent blood. As such, God was providing
His sovereign grace to point them to Calvary where the Lamb of God would die for their sins. Adam and Eve
left the garden realizing that “Without shedding of blood there is no remission” (Heb. 9:22). This was a type
of salvation without works. Nothing that Adam and Eve did deserved salvation. The animal had shed its
blood in Eden to provide a covering for their nakedness; even so the blood of Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God,
covers the criminality of all who believe in Him, and robes them in His righteousness (Rom. 3:24-25).
Cain and Abel, sons of Adam and Eve, brought their sacrifices to God. Both brothers recognized the
existence and the demands of God over their lives. Both brothers brought an offering to God, but only one
offering was acceptable to God. Cain brought the fruit of the …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
Recent Comments