Did Jesus suffer God's wrath instead of us?

[JonC]

I am starting this thread for room. On a thread about to close due to length @Martin Marprelate claimed he would provide passages stating his belief.

Since a kep point of his faith is God punishing our sins laid on Jesus, Jesus experiencing God's wrath against sin, instead of us, I thought this would be a good place to start.

Why? Because if what Jesus suffered was not God's wrath against our sins then his entire theory is nullified.

Now, I know people can start with that idea and then go to the Bible and say "thats what it really teaches". BUT we can do that with any heresy as well.

So I am interested in the passages @Martin Marprelate (and others) have found in the text of S ripture si.ply stating Jesus suffered God's wrath. I think this is a good start.

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

Since a kep point of his faith is God punishing our sins laid on Jesus, Jesus experiencing God's wrath against sin, instead of us, I thought this would be a good place to start.

"In short, the wrath of God comes upon men either for their sins against the light of nature, or against the Law of God, or against the Gospel of Christ.

"There are some on whom no wrath comes here, nor hereafter; who are the vessels of mercy, afore prepared for glory: concerning whom Jehovah says, "fury is not in me";

"and to whom He is all Love, "Love" itself, #Isa 27:4 1Jo 4:16 being sinners indeed, and transgressors of the law of God, they are children of wrath as others, #Eph 2:3 which phrase not only means that they are serving of Wrath, but that, as they are sinners, they are found guilty of it; and not only found guilty, but are Condemned unto it; they are really under the sentence of wrath, Condemnation, and death;

"they are obnoxious to the curse of the Law, which is no other than the Wrath of God; they are liable to it, and in danger of it; and being so near it, how is it that they escape it, and are secured from it?

"They are secured from it by the Decree of God, Who has Appointed them not to Wrath, but to Obtain Salvation, #1Th 5:9 which Decree is unfrustrable by the Oath of God, Who has Swore that He Will not be Wrath with them, #Isa 54:9 which is Immutable: by the Suretyship Engagements of Christ for them, to Bear it in their Room; and till that was Done, God Forbore to Execute the Sentence; called the Forbearance of God, #Ro 3:25 by Christ's actually Bearing the Chastisement of their Peace; by being Made a Curse for them, and Enduring the Wrath of God in their Room;

"whereby He Delivered them from Wrath to Come, #Ps 89:38 1Th 5:10 and by His Righteousness Imputed to them, through which, being Justified, they are Saved from Wrath, #Ro 5:9 though even these persons may have, at times, some apprehensions of the Wrath of God; as, particularly, under first awakenings, and convictions of sin; when the Law works a sense of Wrath in them, and leaves in them a fearful looking for of Judgment and Fiery Indignation;

"when they flee to Christ, from Wrath to Come, and say, "Lord, save us, or we perish"; and afterwards, when under the Hiding of God's Face, or His Afflicting Hand is upon them, they imagine that the Wrath of God lies hard upon them, and His Fierce Wrath goes over them,
#Ps 88:7,16 La 3:1 but in reality, there is no Wrath comes upon them now;

"their Afflictions and Chastisements are all in Love; and there will be no curse hereafter; but they shall always see the Face of God, and be
"in His Presence, where are Fulness of Joy, and Pleasures for Evermore", #Re 3:19 22:3,4.

Jesus experiencing God's wrath against sin, instead of us

The Wrath of God was Laid on Jesus, for the Guilt of His Elect children's sins,
not because Jesus was Made a sinner, which He could not be.

 

[JonC]

"In short, the wrath of God comes upon men either for their sins against the light of nature, or against the Law of God, or against the Gospel of Christ.

"There are some on whom no wrath comes here, nor hereafter; who are the vessels of mercy, afore prepared for glory: concerning whom Jehovah says, "fury is not in me";

"and to whom He is all Love, "Love" itself, #Isa 27:4 1Jo 4:16 being sinners indeed, and transgressors of the law of God, they are children of wrath as others, #Eph 2:3 which phrase not only means that they are serving of Wrath, but that, as they are sinners, they are found guilty of it; and not only found guilty, but are Condemned unto it; they are really under the sentence of wrath, Condemnation, and death;

"they are obnoxious to the curse of the Law, which is no other than the Wrath of God; they are liable to it, and in danger of it; and being so near it, how is it that they escape it, and are secured from it?

"They are secured from it by the Decree of God, Who has Appointed them not to Wrath, but to Obtain Salvation, #1Th 5:9 which Decree is unfrustrable by the Oath of God, Who has Swore that He Will not be Wrath with them, #Isa 54:9 which is Immutable: by the Suretyship Engagements of Christ for them, to Bear it in their Room; and till that was Done, God Forbore to Execute the Sentence; called the Forbearance of God, #Ro 3:25 by Christ's actually Bearing the Chastisement of their Peace; by being Made a Curse for them, and Enduring the Wrath of God in their Room;

"whereby He Delivered them from Wrath to Come, #Ps 89:38 1Th 5:10 and by His Righteousness Imputed to them, through which, being Justified, they are Saved from Wrath, #Ro 5:9 though even these persons may have, at times, some apprehensions of the Wrath of God; as, particularly, under first awakenings, and convictions of sin; when the Law works a sense of Wrath in them, and leaves in them a fearful looking for of Judgment and Fiery Indignation;

"when they flee to Christ, from Wrath to Come, and say, "Lord, save us, or we perish"; and afterwards, when under the Hiding of God's Face, or His Afflicting Hand is upon them, they imagine that the Wrath of God lies hard upon them, and His Fierce Wrath goes over them,
#Ps 88:7,16 La 3:1 but in reality, there is no Wrath comes upon them now;

"their Afflictions and Chastisements are all in Love; and there will be no curse hereafter; but they shall always see the Face of God, and be
"in His Presence, where are Fulness of Joy, and Pleasures for Evermore", #Re 3:19 22:3,4.


The Wrath of God was Laid on Jesus, for the Guilt of His Elect children's sins,
not because Jesus was Made a sinner, which He could not be.

I am sorry, brother, for my lack of clarity.

I understand that men think the Bible teaches different things. I understand that some think it teaches that Jesus suffered God's wrath (I once would have agreed). Men think the Bible teaches all kinds of diverse ideas.

I was asking for actual passages stating that theory.

The whole reason I asked is because I have come to realize that the Bible teaches "what is written" (the actual text of Scripture).

 

[Van]

John 3:36 clearly teaches that if we are saved, God's wrath is removed from us. The verse does not say it was applied to Jesus.

Another aspect might need to be explored, does "wrath" mean "punishment required to restore justice" or does it also require, God's anger toward the person who "stored up His wrath?"

Certainly, Christ became the means of reconciliation for sinners separated from God due to being made sinners and due to any sins they committed. 1 John 2:2.

If we consider an infant, before he or she has done anything bad or good, he or she is already condemned for "unbelief." Hard to see a basis for wrath being driven with anger toward toward the unborn babies or feeble minded individuals unable to believe.

We know the removal process is addressed with phrases like, "washing of regeneration" or "circumcision of Christ" or "cancelled the certificate of debt" having nailed it to the cross. Titus 3:5, Colossians 2:11, and Colossians 2:14.

Final point at issue, if Christ's substitutionary sacrifice provided the means of reconciliation, the means of removal of our sin burden, what God held against us, then a second step is required to accomplish reconciliation, the washing of regeneration when God transfers a lost individual spiritually into Christ.

 

[Van]

In considering this topic further, I have concluded that No, Christ did not suffer the explicit wrath stored against every sinner, but rather suffered sufficiently to justify the forgiveness of every sinner, whether few or many.

Certainly Christ's mission was to become the means of reconciliation for out sins.

And just as certainly, we who have been justified by the sacrifice of His life, shall also be saved from wrath by Christ in the afterlife, as our names have been written in His "Lambs book of life."

In Isaiah 53:6 we see God has caused the sins of all humanity to assail Him. Thus He suffered for all the sin of humanity (i.e of the world) rather than for the specific sins of specific individuals.

Christ's life paid the ransom for all, thus He "bought" not only those to be saved, but also those never to be saved such as the one heading for destruction in 2 Peter 2:1.

Final verse, Christ was "treated" to be sin for our sake, 1 Corinthians 5:21. bit remained "just" (i.e He was the just for the unjust) rather than became unjust.

 

[Brightfame52]

Certainly, Christ became the means of reconciliation

No such thing as the means of reconciliation, Christ death actually reconciled sinners He died for unto God. Rom 5:10

 

[Brightfame52]

I am sorry, brother, for my lack of clarity.

I understand that men think the Bible teaches different things. I understand that some think it teaches that Jesus suffered God's wrath (I once would have agreed). Men think the Bible teaches all kinds of diverse ideas.

I was asking for actual passages stating that theory.

The whole reason I asked is because I have come to realize that the Bible teaches "what is written" (the actual text of Scripture).

Do you believe that Christ died in the stead of guilty sinners that deserved God's Wrath?

 

[JonC]

Do you believe that Christ died in the stead of guilty sinners that deserved God's Wrath?

I believe "what is written" ("every word that cometh forth from God") rather than "leaning on my own understanding".

What passage are you speaking of?

 

[Brightfame52]

I believe "what is written" ("every word that cometh forth from God") rather than "leaning on my own understanding".

What passage are you speaking of?

No passage particular, I'm asking you a question can you please answer it?

 

[JonC]

No passage particular, I'm asking you a question can you please answer it?

The reason I asked is that there are so many ways of taking the question.

I believe that Jesus died as a representative substitute (like headship) insofar as He is the "Second Adam" (between Adam and Christ, He is the Last Adam and Adam was the First Adam).

I believe that Jesus died for our sins, was made sin for us.

I also believe that the wicked will be rightfully judged and punished by God, and that in Christ we escape the wrath to come.

I do not subscribe to any paticular philosophy using those ideas, or Calvin's Atonement theory, if that is what you are asking.

That is why I think it would better if Christians restricted foundational doctrines (important doctrines upon which other doctrines are built) to what God has told us.

 

[Brightfame52]

believe that Jesus died for our sins, was made sin for us.

Okay the word for means hyper:

in behalf of, for the sake of

So our sins caused His Death, He therefore payed the wage of our sins Death.

That releases them He died in behalf of from the penalty of their sins, which is the wrath of God. God's Wrath is on sinners who He did not die for as Eph 5:3-6

3 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;

4 Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.

5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience

 

[JonC]

Okay the word for means hyper:

in behalf of, for the sake of

So our sins caused His Death, He therefore payed the wage of our sins Death.

That releases them He died in behalf of from the penalty of their sins, which is the wrath of God. God's Wrath is on sinners who He did not die for as Eph 5:3-6

3 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;

4 Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.

5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience

Yes, the word is ὑπὲρ. I also studied Greek in seminary. It means "for", above", "on behalf of", "because of".

Jesus died "on behalf of" ("on behalf of" means "as a representative") our sins. "For" is probably a better translation in English, maybe "because of", for the same reason "so" for "Οὕτως" causes confusion with some.

You and I can't assume that those we talk to have the same education. Most have not (most studied something they can do more with). The best most do is look up the meanings of Greek words without having studied the actual language. So if given "on behalf of" they may wander away from the actual passages (we typically think of it applied to people ratger than the actions of people).

 

[Brightfame52]

Yes, the word is ὑπὲρ. I also studied Greek in seminary. It means "for", above", "on behalf of", "because of".

Jesus died "on behalf of" ("on behalf of" means "as a representative") our sins. "For" is probably a better translation in English, maybe "because of", for the same reason "so" for "Οὕτως" causes confusion with some.

You and I can't assume that those we talk to have the same education. Most have not (most studied something they can do more with). The best most do is look up the meanings of Greek words without having studied the actual language. So if given "on behalf of" they may wander away from the actual passages (we typically think of it applied to people ratger than the actions of people).

So what is your point ? Jesus Death appeased the wrath of God for the sins of the elect. All others He did not die in behalf of, must endure God's Wrath for their sins.

 

[JonC]

So what is your point ? Jesus Death appeased the wrath of God for the sins of the elect. All others He did not die in behalf of, must endure God's Wrath for their sins.

I was agreeing with you that Jesus is "the Second Adam" and it was because of our sin that He died. Many conduse Jesus dying on behalf of our sin as Jesus dying instead of us (they miss the actual words of Scripture).

Now, if you have a verse that states that Jesus' death appeased the wrath of God for the sins of the elect then I am more than happy to read the passage.

If you do not have a passage stating that then I am not interested.

The reason is that I believe Jesus' death and resurrection are at the heart of our redemotion, so I am not inclined to believe what a relatively small group of men say the Bible teaches when I have God's own words.

 

[Brightfame52]

I was agreeing with you that Jesus is "the Second Adam" and it was because of our sin that He died. Many conduse Jesus dying on behalf of our sin as Jesus dying instead of us (they miss the actual words of Scripture).

He did die as a substitute; the sins of the elect fell upon Him instead of them Isa 53:6

6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Its simple, their sins were laid on Christ instead of on them.

 

[Brightfame52]

Now, if you have a verse that states that Jesus' death appeased the wrath of God for the sins of the elect then I am more than happy to read the passage.

Dont need that sound bite, He propitiated God for the sins of the elect He died for. If He didnt do that, they would be under wrath for their sins as the rest of mankind. The word propitate hilasmos means:

1. an appeasing, propitiating
2. the means of appeasing, a propitiation

HELPS Word-studies
2434 hilasmós – properly, propitiation; an offering to appease (satisfy) an angry, offended party. 2434 (hilasmós) is only used twice (1 Jn 2:2, 4:10) – both times of Christ's atoning blood that appeases God's wrath, on all confessed sin. By the sacrifice of Himself, Jesus Christ provided the ultimate 2434 /hilasmós ("propitiation").

Topical Lexicon
Meaning and Background
Strong’s Greek 2434 denotes the divinely-provided means by which God’s righteous wrath against sin is averted and fellowship with Him is restored. It presupposes both the holiness of God, which cannot ignore sin, and His love, which has made a way for sinners to be reconciled without compromising His justice.

Strong's Greek: 2434. ἱλασμός (hilasmos) -- Propitiation, Atoning Sacrifice

 

[Brightfame52]

If you do not have a passage stating that then I am not interested.

Then you will miss out on a lot of biblical truth, a lot of truth in the bible comes from comparing scripture with scripture and then drawing a conclusion, sometimes we have verbatim statements, but the majority time it takes study and comparison. Once you set that verbatim standard, you bound yourself to not say anything that doesnt verbatim matches your exact words. Thats a tall standard, I will be watching and so will everyone else.

 

[Zaatar71]

Then you will miss out on a lot of biblical truth, a lot of truth in the bible comes from comparing scripture with scripture and then drawing a conclusion, sometimes we have verbatim statements, but the majority time it takes study and comparison. Once you set that verbatim standard, you bound yourself to not say anything that doesnt verbatim matches your exact words. Thats a tall standard, I will be watching and so will everyone else.

The poster Johnc seems to be a person who is a contrarian. He rejects real biblical scholarship.
No one in church history has gotten anything right according to him, because they did not follow his novel idea of only reading scripture like the Eunuch in Acts 8...except John refuses help from real teachers and pastors. No, he is a lone ranger. like Van ,and Silverhair.

The poster called Martin, I see has tried to help him, offering a very solid blog post. Even though Martin is a pastor/teacher, he rejects his help and instead offers attempted insults , and trashes Martin, who has only offered help/.
He makes as if he understands things, for example, he will throw random names out, from Church history. like Beza, or Knox, Owen, Spurgeon, claims he likes them, even though according to his strange ideas, not one of them teaches what he does.
No one in the history of the church has taught such ideas...ONLY JOHNC has these new truths to post in cyberspace.
Anyone who does not see Penal Substitutionary Atonement, has missed the heart of the gospel message. No one cares to follow such a deviant view!

 

[JonC]

Then you will miss out on a lot of biblical truth, a lot of truth in the bible comes from comparing scripture with scripture and then drawing a conclusion, sometimes we have verbatim statements, but the majority time it takes study and comparison. Once you set that verbatim standard, you bound yourself to not say anything that doesnt verbatim matches your exact words. Thats a tall standard, I will be watching and so will everyone else.

You misunderstand.

I am not saying one passage from one place. While this is sometimes impirtant, depending on the context, we are talking about a broader topic when we speak of doctrines like the Atonement.

When I state my view I typically reference Genesis, Deuteronomy, Isaiah, the Psalms, the Gosoeks, Romans. Hebrews, etc.

I am not looking for a verbatim standard, if you mean a list of specific words.

This is where interpretation comes in. The words stated must mean the concept held, otherwise it is not Gid's Word but what some men (here a relatively small sect) believe the Bible teaches). It woukd be an understanding some hold rather than "every word that comes from God".

For example, if Jesus experienced God's wrath then we would find passages stating that "Jesus suffered God's wrath", "God punished His Elect", "Jesus drank the cup of wrath", etc.

It would be stated in the Bible because it is important.



Another example - another relatively small sect believes that the Bible teaches God will provide material wealth to thise with enough faith. They cannot find this in the Bible, but offer the same defence you have offered here.

Their belief (the prosperity gospel" passes the same standard you apply to your belief. But neither passes the text of Scripture.

 

[JonC]

He did die as a substitute; the sins of the elect fell upon Him instead of them Isa 53:6

6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Its simple, their sins were laid on Christ instead of on them.

Your post is partly true

The Bible does say that Jesus is oyr representative substitute (He is the Second Adam, we are in Christ).

And yes, God laid the iniquity of us all on Him. He was made sin for us. He died on behalf of our sin.

You added "instead of them" to the verse (that part is unbiblical). I doubt you even realized you were changing Scripture. This is the problem with indoctrination and tradition.