A Penal Substitution Theory Interpretation

[JonC]

God can ONLY forgive and justify any sinner on the basis of the Cross of Christ, what he did for them, as our sins were imputed on Him so that His very righteousness imputed on us!

The first part is biblical.

You have to realize most of the interactions between @Martin Marprelate and I have been me playing his game. He cannot defend his presuppositions (he can't answer my question) so he resorted to taking my comments out of context. I have been playing along.

But if you would like an honest discussion I am willing.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

It is simple how I account for that.

I believe man must be born again (something you dismiss as merely symbolic).

First of all, I do not dismiss the New Birth as symbolic as you very well know.
Secondly, God justifies the ungodly, and He does that through the blood of Christ. 'By the blood of Your covenant I have set forth Your prisoners out of the pit where there is no water.' 'He shall see the travail of His soul, and shall be satisfied. By His knowledge shall My righteous Servant justify many; for He shall bear their iniquities.' Being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.'

You insist that the wicked will inherit the kingdom of God.

I believe that God justifies the ungodly and that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. 'Much more then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath by Him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled by the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.'

But 1 Cor 6:9 says "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God?"

I guess you just didn't know.

It certainly does say that, but you are conflating justification and sanctification. God justifies the ungodly when they repent and trust in Christ, but He doesn't leave them that way; one of the great works of the Holy Spirit is to re-write God's righteous laws in us, 'Not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tablets of stone, but in tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart.'

But our repentance, our sanctification, our good works, will not avail us at the judgment, because they are all flawed and incomplete. Nothing but the blood of Christ, shed for sinners on the cross will avail us on that day (Romans 7:24-8:1).. However, if there is no repentance, no sanctification or good works, that is an indication that Christ has not died for us, we have not been justified and we are still in our sins. In that respect, the wicked will certainly not enter the kingdom of God.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

But your solution is God becomes unjust so that people can be saved.

You are simply wrong.

God punishes the wicked. What you reject is that men must be reborn. Rather than changing God, God changes man.

Absolutely men must be reborn
It is not possible that God should become unjust, but nonetheless, God justifies the ungodly, whether you like it or not. And when He does so, a man's faith is accounted to him for righteousness (Romans 4:5).

The Apostle Peter testifies that God 'judges justly (1 Peter 2:23) and in the very next verse declares that Christ 'bore our sins.' And Paul, in Romans 3:25 declares that setting forth Christ as a propitiation was a demonstration of God's righteousness, not a violation of it.

Now what I suggest is that you go and lie down in a darkened room for a while; You are becoming overwrought. Then, if you are interested, we can explore how this apparent contradiction can be.

 

[JonC]

Absolutely men must be reborn
It is not possible that God should become unjust, but nonetheless, God justifies the ungodly, whether you like it or not. And when He does so, a man's faith is accounted to him for righteousness (Romans 4:5).

The Apostle Peter testifies that God 'judges justly (1 Peter 2:23) and in the very next verse declares that Christ 'bore our sins.' And Paul, in Romans 3:25 declares that setting forth Christ as a propitiation was a demonstration of God's righteousness, not a violation of it.

Now what I suggest is that you go and lie down in a darkened room for a while; You are becoming overwrought. Then, if you are interested, we can explore how this apparent contradiction can be.

You are missing the point.

I am saying that at Judgment the wicked will perish. The wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God.

If you disagree, that is fine. But even if I am wrong that does not excuse you from justifying your presuppositions.

God is just and the justifier of sinners.

How?

You say God punished our sinful actions by taking those actions away from us and punishing those actions on Christ so that He can forgive us.

I say God recreates man - man must die to the flesh, to his wickedness, and be made alive in Christ.


My question is where do you get the idea that God must punish sinful actions (as opposed to punishing sinners for their sinful actions)?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

My question is where do you get the idea that God must punish sinful actions (as opposed to punishing sinners for their sinful actions)?

I believe that I have answered this question several times already, but because, in spite of everything, I love you and want to help you, I will expand on the answers I have given and spent a bit of time on it.

Let’s look at a couple of texts in Paul and then at our Lord’s comments on the ‘sinful woman’ in Luke 7:36-50. Paul first:

1 Corinthians 15:3. ‘For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received; that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures.’

Romans 5:8. ‘But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.’

So immediately we can see that Christ died for sins, and that He died for sinners. I see nowhere that Paul makes a difference between them.

Now on to Luke 7:36-50. Verse 47. “Therefore I say to you that her sins, which are many are forgiven.” Here it is the sins that are forgiven, not the woman. But in verse 50: ‘Then He said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you. Go in peace.”’ It is the woman who is saved (by her faith, please note, not by her love or by her actions), not her sins.

Of course, sins, being inanimate, cannot really be forgiven or saved, can they? It is people who are in need of forgiveness and salvation. So why does Paul speak of Christ dying for our sins and why does the Lord Jesus speak of sins being forgiven?

The reason is, of course, that they both see no difference between them. They are using a figure of speech called a Metonymy (@John of Japan is the resident expert on these matters; he will tell us whether I have the right figure). So what’s a metonymy? It is a figure of speech where on word or phrase is used instead of another that is related to it. ‘It indicates such relations as cause and effect, progenitor and posterity, subject and attribute, sign and thing signified’ (Louis Berkhoff, Principles of Biblical Interpretation; Baker Book House, my edition, 1994). Also material and immaterial. So in 1 Thessalonians 5:19, Paul says, ‘Do not quench the Spirit.’ The Spirit Himself is not quenchable; Paul is speaking of the ministrations of the Spirit in our hearts. When Abraham says, “They have Moses and the prophets,” he means that they have their writings, not the people themselves who are long dead. In Isaiah 22:22, the ‘Key of the house of David’ refers not to a Yale lock, but to authority over the royal house. When Luke informs us in Acts of the Apostles 27:37 that there were 276 ‘souls’ on board the ship, he does not mean that they were all disembodied spirits!

So when Paul or Christ speaks of Him dying for sins, it means the same as Him dying for sinners. What is meant is this: that God has given to the Lord Jesus a vast (Revelation 8:9) number of sinners and He has lived the life of perfect obedience to the Father that they have not lived, and paid the penalty due for the sins of each one of them in full. So when God looks, as Judge, at these sinners, He sees only the perfect obedience of the Lord Jesus. As Father, of course, He still sees our failings and lovingly corrects them (Hebrews 12:6).

 

[Martin Marprelate]

You are missing the point.

I don't think so.

I am saying that at Judgment the wicked will perish. The wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God

Unrepentant, unbelieving sinners will certainly perish, but the only people in heaven will be sinners - those who have been 'washed ....sanctified ... justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.' Some of those will have been exceptionally wicked. To quote Wink Martindale, "I know; I was that man."

 

[John of Japan]

I believe that I have answered this question several times already, but because, in spite of everything, I love you and want to help you, I will expand on the answers I have given and spent a bit of time on it.

Let’s look at a couple of texts in Paul and then at our Lord’s comments on the ‘sinful woman’ in Luke 7:36-50. Paul first:

1 Corinthians 15:3. ‘For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received; that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures.’

Romans 5:8. ‘But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.’

So immediately we can see that Christ died for sins, and that He died for sinners. I see nowhere that Paul makes a difference between them.

Now on to Luke 7:36-50. Verse 47. “Therefore I say to you that her sins, which are many are forgiven.” Here it is the sins that are forgiven, not the woman. But in verse 50: ‘Then He said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you. Go in peace.”’ It is the woman who is saved (by her faith, please note, not by her love or by her actions), not her sins.

Of course, sins, being inanimate, cannot really be forgiven or saved, can they? It is people who are in need of forgiveness and salvation. So why does Paul speak of Christ dying for our sins and why does the Lord Jesus speak of sins being forgiven?

The reason is, of course, that they both see no difference between them. They are using a figure of speech called a Metonymy (@John of Japan is the resident expert on these matters; he will tell us whether I have the right figure). So what’s a metonymy? It is a figure of speech where on word or phrase is used instead of another that is related to it. ‘It indicates such relations as cause and effect, progenitor and posterity, subject and attribute, sign and thing signified’ (Louis Berkhoff, Principles of Biblical Interpretation; Baker Book House, my edition, 1994). Also material and immaterial. So in 1 Thessalonians 5:19, Paul says, ‘Do not quench the Spirit.’ The Spirit Himself is not quenchable; Paul is speaking of the ministrations of the Spirit in our hearts. When Abraham says, “They have Moses and the prophets,” he means that they have their writings, not the people themselves who are long dead. In Isaiah 22:22, the ‘Key of the house of David’ refers not to a Yale lock, but to authority over the royal house. When Luke informs us in Acts of the Apostles 27:37 that there were 276 ‘souls’ on board the ship, he does not mean that they were all disembodied spirits!

So when Paul or Christ speaks of Him dying for sins, it means the same as Him dying for sinners. What is meant is this: that God has given to the Lord Jesus a vast (Revelation 8:9) number of sinners and He has lived the life of perfect obedience to the Father that they have not lived, and paid the penalty due for the sins of each one of them in full. So when God looks, as Judge, at these sinners, He sees only the perfect obedience of the Lord Jesus. As Father, of course, He still sees our failings and lovingly corrects them (Hebrews 12:6).

Works for me. "metonymy...Figure of speech in which a word or expression normally or strictly used of one thing is used of something physically or otherwise associated with it" (P. H. Matthews, Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics, 244).

 

[JonC]

I believe that I have answered this question several times already, but because, in spite of everything, I love you and want to help you, I will expand on the answers I have given and spent a bit of time on it.

Let’s look at a couple of texts in Paul and then at our Lord’s comments on the ‘sinful woman’ in Luke 7:36-50. Paul first:

1 Corinthians 15:3. ‘For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received; that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures.’

Romans 5:8. ‘But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.’

So immediately we can see that Christ died for sins, and that He died for sinners. I see nowhere that Paul makes a difference between them.

Now on to Luke 7:36-50. Verse 47. “Therefore I say to you that her sins, which are many are forgiven.” Here it is the sins that are forgiven, not the woman. But in verse 50: ‘Then He said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you. Go in peace.”’ It is the woman who is saved (by her faith, please note, not by her love or by her actions), not her sins.

Of course, sins, being inanimate, cannot really be forgiven or saved, can they? It is people who are in need of forgiveness and salvation. So why does Paul speak of Christ dying for our sins and why does the Lord Jesus speak of sins being forgiven?

The reason is, of course, that they both see no difference between them. They are using a figure of speech called a Metonymy (@John of Japan is the resident expert on these matters; he will tell us whether I have the right figure). So what’s a metonymy? It is a figure of speech where on word or phrase is used instead of another that is related to it. ‘It indicates such relations as cause and effect, progenitor and posterity, subject and attribute, sign and thing signified’ (Louis Berkhoff, Principles of Biblical Interpretation; Baker Book House, my edition, 1994). Also material and immaterial. So in 1 Thessalonians 5:19, Paul says, ‘Do not quench the Spirit.’ The Spirit Himself is not quenchable; Paul is speaking of the ministrations of the Spirit in our hearts. When Abraham says, “They have Moses and the prophets,” he means that they have their writings, not the people themselves who are long dead. In Isaiah 22:22, the ‘Key of the house of David’ refers not to a Yale lock, but to authority over the royal house. When Luke informs us in Acts of the Apostles 27:37 that there were 276 ‘souls’ on board the ship, he does not mean that they were all disembodied spirits!

So when Paul or Christ speaks of Him dying for sins, it means the same as Him dying for sinners. What is meant is this: that God has given to the Lord Jesus a vast (Revelation 8:9) number of sinners and He has lived the life of perfect obedience to the Father that they have not lived, and paid the penalty due for the sins of each one of them in full. So when God looks, as Judge, at these sinners, He sees only the perfect obedience of the Lord Jesus. As Father, of course, He still sees our failings and lovingly corrects them (Hebrews 12:6).

I know you think you have answered the question, but you have not.

I don't need an explanation (I believed and taught the theory for decades). I understand exactly what you mean.

I ask the question for others who may pass by.

Biblically divine justice is an expression of God's nature (as spiritual actions are expressions of one born of the Spirit and sins are expressions of ones sinfulness).

The problem is not actions but the person (the nature of the person) committing those actions.

When Scripture says God will punish sins it is referring to punishing the sinner for those sins. Sins, obviously, cannot be transfered from a person. Sins are not literally punished, sinners are punished for their sins.

God forgives sins upon repentance based on the work of Christ. This was true in the OT as those of God had faith in the Promise and it is true now.

The wicked will be punished "in that day", I e , Judgment when God separated the people. Two people's will stand before the Judge. One remains in their sins and will perish. The other has been washed, cleansed, reborn, recreated, born of the Spirit.....i.e., they are not wicked.

God is just and the justifier of sinners.

For those who are willing to examine their faith, consider where you are getting your ideas of justice. Consider that the philosophy of justness held by Penal Substitution Theory did not exist in its form until the 16th century, and existed prior this in an infant form within Stoic philosophers. It is unbilical.

Christ bore our sins, God laid our iniquities on Him, it was God's will to crush Him, He became sin for us, He became a curse for us, and He shared our infirmaty.

But God did not punish Christ instead of punishing us to forgive us. God does not have to punish sins in order to forgive the sinner.

 

[37818]

But God did not punish Christ instead of punishing us to forgive us. God does not have to punish sins in order to forgive the sinner.

Well. If the sinner died for his own sins his soul would perish forever. Christ's soul died on the cross for a moment in time for everyone. So yes, there is that difference.

 

[JonC]

Well. If the sinner died for his own sins his soul would perish forever. Christ's soul died on the cross for a moment in time for everyone. So yes, there is that difference.

You are confusing two distinct consequences of sin.

It is appointed to man once to die and then the judgment. We all die, physically, as a result of sin. The "second death" is at Judgment.

If you are a sinner, if you are wicked, at Judgment then you will experience the "second death".

If, however, you are in Christ then you are no longer "of the flesh" but are "of the Spirit". You are not among the wicked that will not inherit the kingdom of God. You are reborn, a new creation.

God is immutable (He does not change). God's Word is everlasting. This is one reason we can know that Penal Substitution Theory is unbilical.

 

[37818]

You are confusing two distinct consequences of sin.

It is appointed to man once to die and then the judgment. We all die, physically, as a result of sin. The "second death" is at Judgment.

If you are a sinner, if you are wicked, at Judgment then you will experience the "second death".

If, however, you are in Christ then you are no longer "of the flesh" but are "of the Spirit". You are not among the wicked that will not inherit the kingdom of God. You are reborn, a new creation.

God is immutable (He does not change). God's Word is everlasting. This is one reason we can know that Penal Substitution Theory is unbilical.

How that theory is unBiblical needs to be qualified. What I had stated was not confusing anything, but pointing out a true distinction.

Also those believers whole are alive when Christ returns will have never had seen for themselves the physical death.

 

[JonC]

How that theory is unBiblical needs to be qualified. What I had stated was not confusing anything, but pointing out a true distinction. Those believers whole are alive when Christ returns will have never had seen for themselves the physical death.

It is unbilical because its teaching replaces what is taught in the Bible. 90% is biblical. And you guys offer that 90% ignoring the 10% that is human philosophy.

It has been qualified. God does not, per Scripture, have to punish sins in order to forgive sinners.

Those who are alive when Christ returns will be transformed. They will not remain in the flesh. It is appointed to man once to die and then the judgment.

 

[37818]

It is unbilical because its teaching replaces what is taught in the Bible. 90% is biblical.

Without specifics, it is just meaningless rhetoric.

 

[JesusFan]

The first part is biblical.

You have to realize most of the interactions between @Martin Marprelate and I have been me playing his game. He cannot defend his presuppositions (he can't answer my question) so he resorted to taking my comments out of context. I have been playing along.

But if you would like an honest discussion I am willing.

Do you see Justification as a one time event, happening very moment one receives Jesus as lord thru faith alone?

 

[JesusFan]

It is unbilical because its teaching replaces what is taught in the Bible. 90% is biblical. And you guys offer that 90% ignoring the 10% that is human philosophy.

It has been qualified. God does not, per Scripture, have to punish sins in order to forgive sinners.

Those who are alive when Christ returns will be transformed. They will not remain in the flesh. It is appointed to man once to die and then the judgment.

The soul that sins must taste death, and we are all accountable and guilty to God for all sins, so who paid for them?

 

[JonC]

Without specifics, it is just meaningless rhetoric.

OK. Specifically the one idea that God cannot truly forgive sins, that Christ experienced God's wrath, and that Christ suffered and died instead of us is foreign to Scripture.

The Bible says God does forgive sins, God does not punish the Righteous, God's Word is everlasting, and sins are not transferred.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

.
The Bible says God does forgive sins

If He does so without Christ satisfying His justice, He is justifying the wicked which is an abomination to Him.

God does not punish the Righteous

God punishes sin; Christ was the sin-bearer. 1 Peter 2:24; Isaiah 53:10.

God's Word is everlasting

Agreed.

and sins are not transferred.

Yes they are. Isaiah 53:6.

I will reply to your post #68 as and when I have time.[/QUOTE]

 

[JonC]

If He does so without Christ satisfying His justice, He is justifying the wicked which is an abomination to Him.

This is a false assumption (and a logical error). Long before Penal Substitution Theory was dreamed up Christians believed God just and the justifier of sinners. Why do you believe they were wrong?

The problem is the passage you reference makes two observations - God does not acquit the wicked and God does not punish the just.

God is just. His wrath is on the wicked (the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God but will face the wrath we escape in Christ).

God justifies sinners. God recreates the wicked, He removed their heart of stone and puts a new heart in them, gives them a new spirit, puts His Spirit in them, sprinkles clean water on them and they shall be clean.

Penal Substitution Theory is based on error, period.

 

[37818]

OK. Specifically the one idea that God cannot truly forgive sins, that Christ experienced God's wrath, and that Christ suffered and died instead of us is foreign to Scripture.

What of that is not in the following? Mark 10:45. Isaiah 53:6. Romans 5:8. 1 Corinthians 15:3. Galatians 3:13. And any others that do cover what Jesus did as the Christ. The distinctions really need to be made.

 

[JonC]

What of that is not in the following? Mark 10:45. Isaiah 53:6. Romans 5:8. 1 Corinthians 15:3. Galatians 3:13. And any others that do cover what Jesus did as the Christ. The distinctions really need to be made.

None of that is following those passages.

You are assuming that sins can be transfered from one person to another (Scripture speaks of sins being laid on Christ, Christ sharing our infirmaty....not our sins being transfered from us). You are assuming that it is impossible for God to forgive sins. You are assuming God must punish sins (sinful actions). You are assuming God punished Christ.

You are reading all of those things into Scripture and seeing them there when they aren't.

Think of the OT sacrifice. Scripture teaches they were a means (not the actual sacrifice but the obedience of the people) of God passing over sins. The animals bore the sins (the consequences of sin) and they died for those sins. But it was faith that was reckoned to them as righteousness, not punishment exercised on the animals.

Likewise, Christ bore our sins, died for our sins, shared our iniquitiy.