Featured PSA In The Early Church

His death was no more torturous then any by Roman crucifixion.

I know this sounds alarming, but it is never the less true.

What IS alarming is that He was totally innocent and ALL involved in the decision to have Him crucified KNEW it. This is as Peter pointed out in Acts.

As far as the "wrath and judgement due us" taken on by the Christ, please show me in the Scriptures such expression concerning the cross.

For the Scriptures surely teach that the wrath of God is stored up until that great day in which He will cause it to be poured out upon the creation.

 

I have read virtually nothing written by Wright other then perhaps an excerpt on line.

My views came by God placing students that ask probing questions that caused me to rethink.

What better way to describe the divine wrath poured out upon the Christ then as "divine Child abuse?"

Isn't that what PSA is teaching?

Doesn't it hold that The Father, incapable of the sight of sin without bringing judgement, was obliged to express His wrath upon the Son, and therefore causing disunity and disharmony in the trinity, and therefore, God Himself sinned?

That is heretical. Yet, it is it not a common presentation of the cross?

PSA is wrong.

 

What is blashemy?

That PSA teaches that God was so incensed with the Son doing what the Father stated must be done that He determined to pour out His divine wrath upon His "beloved son" and so much so that He compelled the Son to suffer in the torments of Hell.

It sure is blashemy.

 

Certainly the apostles and church fathers didn't teach this. That is what JonC and I have been posting from the very start.

However, you are wrong that the PSA doesn't teach this. It does.

Even on the thread some have expressed that the Christ had to experience what was due humankind, and that God's divine justice obliged Him to respond by condemning the Son.

The problem as we have been showing that is is false. It is exuberance at best in a vain attempt to stir human emotions.

One must remember that just as the OT sacrifice to that which was pure and innocent, the Lord Jesus Christ was totally pure and innocent even through to this day. He took upon Himself the sin, but this did not displease God, rather just as in the OT it pleased Him, and satisfied the demands of the Law decrees written against us.

 

What are these words to mean, in your own words?

"In other words, Christ endured the punishment His people deserve in their place."
​

 

Peter rightly quotes Isaiah 53 (Verses 4,5, 6, and 9) saying:

21For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in His footsteps:
22“He committed no sin,
and no deceit was found in His mouth.”

23When they heaped abuse on Him,
He did not retaliate;
when He suffered, He made no threats,
but entrusted Himself to Him who judges justly.

24He Himself bore our sins
in His body on the tree,
so that we might die to sin
and live to righteousness.

“By His stripes you are healed.”

25For “you were like sheep going astray,”
but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.
​

Do you see even a hint that God poured out His wrath upon the Son?
WHO was it that "heaped abuse on Him."

When He was suffering Whom did the Savior entrust Himself? (Father into Thy hands ...)

Certainly, He bore our sins - that is not in dispute.
Certainly, by His strips we are healed.

But PSA doesn't stop with this. They go on to wax eloquent that God had to have divine justice in the form of His wrath poured out upon the Son.

Such isn't biblically found in the Scriptures.

 

That is made clear in Isaiah 53:10, though as I've pointed out many times, God was not wrathful towards His Son, but against sin, and Christ was the sin-bearer..
When Joseph says to his brothers, "So now it was not you who sent me here but God" (Genesis 43:8), he knows quite well that it was the brothers and the Ishmaelite traders who sent him to Egypt, but he recognizes God's hand behind it all, and so, rightly, gives all the glory to God.
So why will you not give all the glory to God for saving us all? The Son and the Father worked together to redeem God's people, the most glorious event in all history, and He says, "I am the LORD, that is My name; and My glory I will not give to another" (Isaiah 42:8). He will certainly not share it with wicked men!

 

As has been shown through multiple posts, Isaiah 53 does not display God being wrathful toward the son in the slightest.

Again, Why would God be wrathful against sin and yet punish the sin - bearer. How is it possible For the Holy God to beat upon the one who is innocent and holy and that Holy God remain Holy?

Besides if the Lord Jesus became dirtied, then the unclean cannot make the unclean clean.

What makes you think I have not given God the total glory of saving those of His choosing?

I'm am glad to see that you present the Father and Son working in concert to redeem, and I also include by providing the redemption.

What I would like to see is that folks move from the thinking that God poured out His wrath upon the Son, to that which the Scriptures support and that is the Lord was victorious over sin, death and the grave. That the crucifixion was the tool used to bring lasting reconciliation between the violation of the decrees of the Law and God, and that because of the cross believers pass from death to eternal life into His presence.

 

All the letters attributed to Ignatius can be deemed a 3rd century forgery or later.

 

As has been shown in multiple posts, Isaiah 53 absolutely does display God being wrathful, not towards Christ, but against sin, which is why He set forth the Lord Jesus as a propitiation so that He might be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus.

I really can't spend any more time to-ing and fro-ing on this . I have four sermons to give in the next month and I need to get on with the preparation of them. I will just leave you with this extract from J.I. Packer:

'Jesus knew on the cross all the pain, physical and mental, than man could inflict and also the divine wrath and rejection that my sins deserve; for he was there in my place, making atonement for me'
[J.I. Packer, 'I want to be a Christian,' Kingsway Books, 1984]

 

Bottom line.

Christ bore the sins, and carried our sorrows. There is no doubt of that being Scripture.

Some claim God punished the sin, but then attempt to present this wasn’t punishing the sin bearer.

The is no Scripture to support such a claim.

Some point to Isaiah, but it isn’t there.

The most detailed presentation is Psalm 22. It isn’t there.

At no place is there Scripture to be found supporting the thinking God poured out His wrath upon the Son, nor is there any stating God poured wrath out on the Sin the Son carried, yet some how the wrath missed the Son.

So here is a solution.

Just as in the OT where no wrath of the atonement offering is shown if it is pure and the high priest worthy, the God of Israel was satisfied and the reconciliation made for another year.

Christ offered once for all met the same requirements of God being satisfied for eternity. No wrath on the Son, no wrath on the Sin.

Is there a NT example given by Christ. Certainly.

I refer you to the parable of the owner of the field sending servant to collect, and finally sending his own son. Who beat him and had him killed? The owner of the field or the servants?

Christ was victorious.