PSA

[DaveXR650]

I believe PSA treats sins much too lightly.

Well people should judge for themselves. PSA has sin as something which we simply cannot bear, nor can we make recompense for. The violation of the law has no remedy. Is that treating it too lightly?

PSA holds God demands somebody (the wicked or the righteous) to pay Him the debt owed to Him, the righteous being punished instead of the wicked to pay this debt thereby making everything right.

Not just "somebody". That is why much is made of why Jesus was unique in being able to do this because he was God and Man, and he was totally sinless himself. In addition, for a serious person, not cynically saying "thereby making everything right", they also realize that penal substitution opens the door to and makes reconciliation possible by removing the insurmountable barrier for sinful men.

Even in strict Calvinism, the work of God goes beyond the death of Christ with a setting aside for election, bringing about faith and repentance, unity with Christ and living a life of progressive sanctification. "Everything" includes all that as well as the death of Christ, with Calvinism asserting the certainty of the rest happening in time as God planned and non Calvinists looking at is as a potential reconciliation that will depend upon men's response to the gospel. But no one is saying that there is no more to explain in the chain of salvation. That is a straw man you set up to try to make it look ridiculous while championing ideas like fooling Satan or paying him.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

We all believe Christ died in our place.
We all believe He bore our sins.
We all believe He bore the penalty of our sins.

Some seem to think that PSA defines Christ dying in our place as a substitution (instead of us) rather than representative substitution (a second type of Adam).

If PSA was really defined as "Jesus had died in my place, bearing my sin and its punishment for me, so I could know God and live with him forever" and it did not matter if it was God's punishment or Satan's punishment, simple or representative punishment, ontological or judicial...etc. then PSA is meaningless because it can mean so many different things.

@DaveXR650 has given a number of excellent definitions of PSA. I have given the same definition times without number: '....that God gave Himself in the Person of His Son to suffer instead of us the death, punishment and curse due to fallen humanity.' That is all I have ever argued for. So if "we all believe" that 'Christ dying in our place, bearing our sins and the penalty of them' is the same as Him 'suffering instead of us the death, punishment and curse due to us,' then we do indeed all agree. How wonderful! Let joy be unconfined! Let a million flowers bloom! We can finally put this argument to bed and move on.
We can agree that @JonC's 'penal substitution theory' is wrong, which is what he has been arguing, and that the doctrine of Penal Substitution, which is what I have been arguing for, is correct. Hurrah! We're both right! Let the ECFs believe whatever it was they believed, and move on.

 

[JonC]

If the curse is issued by God, and Satan received his own curse at the time of man’s fall, how does Satan have any power?
He appears to me to be the proverbial bull in the china shop. He has no care for the damage he causes. I don’t see him as any kind of shop owner making Christ take the weight of anything that we break.
IMO, you give a fallen Satan too much credit.

The curse (the law of sin and death) is not issued by God. Sin produces death (James 1:15), it is the snare of Satan (2 Tim 2:26), Jesus died to destroy the power of the one who holds the power of death- that is, the devil (Heb 2:14-15), and Christ was put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the Spirit (1 Pet 3:18).

But that is physical death (death of the flesh).

It is appointed man once to die and then the Judgment (Heb 9:27).

Where PSA treats this as the same, Scripture does not. But both needs to be addressed.

Christ suffering Satan's wrath (wages of sin, the death produced by sin, the first death) defeated Satan as Christ was judged righteous.

In terms of the Judgment the state of man has to be addressed. Jesus IS the Propitiation for our sins, and in Him we escape the wrath to come.

BUT this is by Christ rather than the Father punishing Him. It is based on His righteousness. The blood of Christ actually cleanses us from all unrighteousness (1 Jn 3:7). The first Adam was made a living soul, but the Second Adam was made a life giving Spirit (1 Cor 15:45). We die to the "old self", put on the "new self", and are re-created in the image of Christ (Romans 8:29, Colossians 3:10, 2 Corinthians 3:18).

Christ frees us from the bondage of sin and death (Satan's power) and cleanses us from all unrighteous (God's judgment in view).

 

[JonC]

We can agree that @JonC's 'penal substitution theory' is wrong, which is what he has been arguing, and that the doctrine of Penal Substitution,

You are wrong. That was Paul Enns definition. The other was John Owen's definition.

You teach it does not matter if Jesus suffered God's wrath or Satan's wrath, if Jesus' death in our place was simple substitution or representative substitution.

But no Calvinistic theologian holds your view of PSA. You have changed it so much that it is meaningless.

 

[JonC]

Well people should judge for themselves. PSA has sin as something which we simply cannot bear, nor can we make recompense for. The violation of the law has no remedy. Is that treating it too lightly?

Yes, PSA is treating sin too lightly .

We all believe that sin is something men cannot bear (without experiencing the Second Death). We all believe man cannot make recompense for his own sin.

But where you view God as punishing Jesus for our sins so God cannot hold us accountable, traditional Christianity says that will not work because sin is more significant an issue than accounting for punishment.

God will not punish the righteous. God will punish the wicked. It is about righteousness and unrighteous.

Man must be born of the Spirit, made into the image of Christ.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

You are wrong. That was Paul Enns definition. The other was John Owen's definition.

Heigh-ho! I'll cancel the flowers.

You teach it does not matter if Jesus suffered God's wrath or Satan's wrath

The Lord Jesus did not suffer God's wrath at any time. He always remained the Beloved Son. And while Satan undoubtedly hated Him and sought to kill Him at various points, at the cross he had nothing to do with it, and you will find no text that says he did.

if Jesus' death in our place was simple substitution or representative substitution.

He died for me. I was one of those given to Him to redeem before the foundation of the world, and He has lost none of us (John 6:39). That is a Calvinistic understanding, but PSA is not necessarily a Calvinistic doctrine. Arminians have a different understanding of it. Socinians, of course, hate PSA.

But no Calvinistic theologian holds your view of PSA.

If you had read the book Pierced for our Transgressions, as you claimed some years ago, you would know that its authors were all Calvinists. Mike Ovey, in particular, was a highly respected theologian.

You have changed it so much that it is meaningless.

One of us has, but in fact it is you who has developed your very own 'penal substitution theory' so that you can use it as an Aunt Sally to throw your rather pathetic brickbats at.

Oh yes, and I'm still waiting for you to tell us all exactlywhat your obejection is to the statement, '....that God gave Himself in the Person of His Son to suffer instead of us the death, punishment and curse due to fallen humanity.'

 

[JonC]

The Lord Jesus did not suffer God's wrath at any time.

I am glad you now see that Jesus did not experience God's wrath.

That is a start towards a biblical understanding.

 

[DaveXR650]

But where you view God as punishing Jesus for our sins so God cannot hold us accountable, traditional Christianity says that will not work because sin is more significant an issue than accounting for punishment.

This is why I think it is time to put this whole thing to bed. I cannot tolerate this constant misrepresentation of what has been carefully explained over years, at this point. "so God cannot hold us accountable" is the most blasphemous and deliberately ignorant statement and yet you continue to use it. Beware of attacking God's only plan for your redemption. A plan the Trinity made and all participated in, with God folding the just penalty for our sin back upon himself. You know enough at this point that your mocking puts you firmly in the Socinians camp. You cannot find such mocking from any of the church fathers although you find some evidence they actually believed in PSA, along with some other aspects of the atonement which can be easily found in the Reformation era writings as well. I'm done with your willing ignorance on this Jon. At least I hope it is ignorance.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I am glad you now see that Jesus did not experience God's wrath.

That is a start towards a biblical understanding.

Proof positive that you never read my posts. I have maintained this here for almost 20 years!
God's wrath is against sin and sinners, and the Lord Jesus willingly bore that wrath and paid the penalty for it in full on the cross. But He never ceased to be the beloved Son.

 

[JonC]

Proof positive that you never read my posts. I have maintained this here for almost 20 years!
God's wrath is against sin and sinners, and the Lord Jesus willingly bore that wrath and paid the penalty for it in full on the cross. But He never ceased to be the beloved Son.

No. Awhile back you claimed that Jesus experienced that wrath and punishment but it was because He bore our sins.

You claimed that God did not punish Jesus but that God punished our sins on Jesus.

I do not think it wise to deny that Jesus actually suffered and died, that only our sins experienced that suffering.

 

[JonC]

This is why I think it is time to put this whole thing to bed. I cannot tolerate this constant misrepresentation of what has been carefully explained over years, at this point. "so God cannot hold us accountable" is the most blasphemous and deliberately ignorant statement and yet you continue to use it.

Ignorance???

I ASKED YOU:

So basically God punished Jesus in our place so that He would not have to hold us accountable for our actions?

Well, yes but the way I would put it is more like this...

You should apologize for your insults - implying I was being deliberately ignorant and blasphemous.

I asked you if that is your view. You said it was. Now you insult me for taking you at your word.

 

[DaveXR650]

You should apologize for your insults - implying I was being deliberately ignorant and blasphemous.

I asked you if that is your view. You said it was. Now you insult me for taking you at your word.

You illustrate once again that these charges are true. Post 89 answers your concerns, once again, and for the umpteeth time, if you were honestly trying to understand. Not only that but "wrath" when referring to God has been explained many times as being in God's case a just and proper reactions against sin whereas our wrath is usually more based on an insult to our own ego. After this is explained, to keep using it is inexcusable. But you will hammer this for the next 20 year, manipulating and deleting posts along the way, banning people from threads you deem untouchable, until you have driven this site into oblivion.

 

[Ben1445]

I have great news for everyone!!

What we think about what Jesus did doesn’t affect what Jesus did. What we think doesn't change the course of Jesus Christ as the Savior of men.
All you are required to do is trust Him to handle the details. That is faith.
That said, I think we can deescalate the conflict several degrees.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

No. Awhile back you claimed that Jesus experienced that wrath and punishment but it was because He bore our sins.

You claimed that God did not punish Jesus but that God punished our sins on Jesus.

I do not think it wise to deny that Jesus actually suffered and died, that only our sins experienced that suffering.

You really don't get it, do you? Even after all this time.

 

[JonC]

I have great news for everyone!!

What we think about what Jesus did doesn’t affect what Jesus did. What we think doesn't change the course of Jesus Christ as the Savior of men.
All you are required to do is trust Him to handle the details. That is faith.
That said, I think we can deescalate the conflict several degrees.

We could, if it were not for this:

So basically God punished Jesus in our place so that He would not have to hold us accountable for our actions?

Well, yes but the way I would put it is more like this.... .

I cannot tolerate this constant misrepresentation of what has been carefully explained over years, at this point. "so God cannot hold us accountable" is the most blasphemous and deliberately ignorant statement ... I'm done with your willing ignorance on this Jon. At least I hope it is ignorance.

I know, @Ben1445 , that we do not agree on positions. And that is fine. I do not demand agreement (I want us to understand one another, and I enjoy honest arguments).

But cannot you see why @DaveXR650 's post is dishonest?

1. I asked him if that was his view.

2. He said it was but he'd word it differently.

3. I leaned on what he told me he believed.

4. He implied I was being deliberately ignorant and blasphemous for stating what he said he believed was true.

Can you honestly not see the problem I have with his post?

 

[JonC]

You really don't get it, do you? Even after all this time.

I know what you said, and that is all I can go on.

I get that you believe God was not being wrathful to Jesus. But you said that Jesus did not experience God's wrath.

Most Calvinists would have said that God was not being wrathful towards Jesus when Jesus experienced God's wrath.

You did not.

 

[JonC]

You illustrate once again that these charges are true...

What did Christ's death, per PSA, accomplish?

So basically God punished Jesus in our place so that He would not have to hold us accountable for our actions?

Well, yes but the way I would put it is more like this. ...

I cannot tolerate this constant misrepresentation of what has been carefully explained over years, at this point. "so God cannot hold us accountable" is the most blasphemous and deliberately ignorant statement and yet you continue to use it. ... I'm done with your willing ignorance on this Jon.

I was repeating what YOU said was your belief, although you would have worded it differently.

You should have apologized and we would have moved on.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I know what you said, and that is all I can go on.

I get that you believe God was not being wrathful to Jesus. But you said that Jesus did not experience God's wrath.

Most Calvinists would have said that God was not being wrathful towards Jesus when Jesus experienced God's wrath.

You did not.

The Lord Jesus experienced God's wrath AGAINST SIN. Of course He did. I think you are being intentionally (?) dense.
I particularly like the Stott quotation that @DaveXR650 posted earlier. '"The cross was not a commercial bargain with the devil, let alone one which tricked and trapped him; nor an exact equivalent, a quid pro quo to satisfy a code of honor or technical point of law; nor a compulsory submission by by God to some moral authority above him from which he could not otherwise escape; nor punishment of a meek Christ by a harsh and punitive Father; nor a procurement of salvation by a loving Christ by a mean and reluctant Father, nor an action of the Father which bypassed Christ as Mediator."
'God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them.' 'No one takes My life from Me, but I lay it down of Myself...' Father and Son worked together for the salvation of mankind and the preservation of God's righteousness.

 

[JonC]

The Lord Jesus experienced God's wrath AGAINST SIN. Of course He did. I think you are being intentionally (?) dense.

No. I may be dense but not intentionally so.

I am trying to go off of what you wrote about your belief.

So Jesus did experience, in your opinion, God's wrath. God's wrath was against our sins.

Do you draw a distinction between the death that our sin produces, or the death that is the power of Satan as Satan is the author of sin and the "father" of sinners and God's judgment?

Or do you view the death all men are appointed to experience and the judgment that follows as one and the same?

 

[DaveXR650]

1. I asked him if that was his view.

2. He said it was but he'd word it differently.

3. I leaned on what he told me he believed.

4. He implied I was being deliberately ignorant and blasphemous for stating what he said he believed was true.

Can you honestly not see the problem I have with his post?

As you have done 100 times and then I answer 100 times, as well as the answers found in this post, including post 98 above.