In support of Penal Substitutionary Atonement

[Van]

Thank you for answering my question. You really haven't had enough of C vs A arguments. Why not go to the C vs A section and pursue your obsession there?
PSA states that God gave Himself in the person of His Son to suffer instead of us the death, punishment and curse due to fallen humanity as the penalty for sin.
You are free to suppose that the "us" means all mankind if you wish to. It doesn't really change the doctrine.

Once again Martin addresses and mischaracterizes my behavior rather than the topic. See a pattern.

Did Martin tell us to whom the "us" in his definition refers? Nope

Martin, or at least the doctrine of PSA says the "us" refers only to the elect, supposedly chosen before creation, rather than all humanity as taught by 1 Timothy 2:6 and 2 Peter 2:1

 

[DaveXR650]

Did Martin tell us to whom the "us" in his definition refers? Nope

Yes he did. "Us" refers to everyone or the elect. The issue of "who" is not addressed in penal substitution. You can't keep saying that it does and not look ridiculous because many people who believe in a universal atonement also believe in penal substitution. That is not the issue here.

I would agree with you that the idea of a particular or limited atonement does rely on a presupposition that PSA is true. I believe that salvation itself depends on PSA being true. Because we are totally passive in the events that provided it it is not essential to understand all that in order to be saved. If you don't like particular or limited atonement then reject it but keep PSA. There are certain doctrines that because they involve things done to us or for us we don't have to understand them in order to come to Christ and be saved. But if you truly and knowingly reject the idea of penal substitution I think that is a heresy that is extremely dangerous, even fatal. It's a little like belief in Christ's virgin birth. Many people get saved without understanding what that means or why it had to be. But a conscious rejection of that probably means you are not a believer.

If it turns out in the end that you were saved because God chose you from the beginning of time and at the right time Christ died for your sins and then the Holy Spirit irresistibly gave you faith and repentance and you thought all along that it was all because you decided to believe - you know what? It won't matter because you are going by your perception of how you felt at the time. God won't blame you for that. And if it turns out the opposite, that it really was your decision and your own responsibility to believe, the folks who thought their faith was a gift and they were elect will be fine, also. But if you decide that there was no need for Christ to die for your sins, or shed his blood for you and you consciously reject THAT - well, I don't think you will be alright. This issue is more important than the extent of the atonement, or the order of salvation.

 

[Van]

Yes he did. "Us" refers to everyone or the elect. SNIP.

LOL, Who is on first? Who!

 

[Arthur King]

5 Biblical Corrections to Penal Substitution

1) The Problem/Solution Narrative:

According to penal substitution, the central problem with humanity is that we deserve wrath, and the central solution is that we avoid it because Jesus suffers this wrath in our place. Problem: deserving wrath / Solution: avoiding wrath

But in the Bible, sin is a much greater problem than the punishment it incurs. Sin is destruction against the self, against others, and against the world. Even if God never lifted a finger to punish sin, sin itself would still plunge sinners into destruction and misery. The Bible takes God and sin more seriously than penal substitution. In the Bible, the central problem is that humanity is dead in sin, and the central solution is that we are raised to new life in Christ (see Ephesians 2:1-10). Problem: dead in sin / Solution: resurrection in Christ.

2) The Justice or Injustice of Jesus’ Death

According to penal substitution, Jesus suffers death on the cross justly, or deservedly, as a guilty party. Justice is satisfied in the death of Christ as the retributive demands of God’s law are carried out on Jesus in place of humanity.

But in the Bible, Jesus suffers death on the cross unjustly as a perfectly innocent party. Justice is satisfied in the resurrection as the reversal of Jesus’ unjust death on the cross, and the fulfillment of God’s covenantal promises.

3) The Priority of Retribution and Restitution

According to penal substitution, the main priority of justice for atonement is retribution for the guilty.

But in the Bible, the main priority of justice for atonement is restitution for damages done to the innocent. Jesus’ death is not unique in that he dies (we all die and are in fact already dead in sin), but that he alone dies unjustly as an innocent party, and thus merits the restitution (reversal) of all the sin and death he suffered.

4) The Debt that Jesus Pays

According to penal substitution, Jesus pays the debt of punishment on behalf of humanity when he dies.

But in the Bible, there is no such thing as a “debt of punishment” that humanity owes to God. Humanity deserves punishment, but it is not something paid to God as a debt. “The wages of sin is death”—wages and debts are exact opposites. Death is earned, not owed. What Jesus pays in his life and in his death is our debt of love and obedience.

5) Substitution vs Union:

According to penal substitution, Jesus dies instead of humanity. Jesus dies "in our place" and "as our substitute" and "he suffered so we won’t have to" and “he died the death we should have died.”

But in the Bible, Jesus dies with humanity. Jesus says, “take up your cross and follow me.” Jesus dies the death we are called to die.