Featured Penal Substitution Gospel

There can be little doubt that Jesus viewed his death as a representative sacrifice for "the many." Not only is His thought saturated in Isa. 53 (which is a doctrine of representative suffering), but His words over the cup -- indeed, the whole narrative of the Last Supper -- almost demand to be interpreted in terms of a sacrifice in whose virtue His followers can share. The idea of substitution which is prominent in Isa. 53 appears in the ransom saying. And it requires only a little reading between the lines to find in the "cup" saying, the story of the Agony, and the cry of dereliction, evidence that Christ's sufferings were what, for lack of a better word, we can only call "penal."
[Taken from A. M. Hunter, The Words And Works Of Jesus p.100]

 

I had not intended to post here again so soon (if ever) and I shall not be responding to replies to this post. However, I feel the need to respond to certain inaccuracies (to use no stronger word) that have been made recently.

That JonC regards Boyd and Chalke as 'serious Baptist theologians' speaks volumes. No one would have mentioned them had he not brought the names up.

Now the problem here is that @JonC has his own 'penal substitution theory' which means whatever he wants it to mean.
God did not punish the Lord Jesus; He punished sin, and our Lord was the sin-bearer (! Peter 2:24 etc.) Nor did He die under God's wrath. At the ninth hour, the Lord Jesus declared, "It is finished!" and it was, save for the dismissing of His Spirit which happened almost immediately. His act of propitiation was over; the atonement for His people was achieved, and the price of their redemption (Psalms 49:7-8; 1 Peter 1:18-19) was paid.
I have given the definition of the Doctrine of Penal Substitution so many times that I'm sick of it, but here it is again since @JonC seems to have forgotten it. It is not my definition, so no one can accuse me of having made it up; it is that given in the book Pierced for our Transgressions.' "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.

The truth is that @JonC and others have constantly pointed to various church fathers to claim (wrongly) validity for their theories.

The truth of Penal Substitution is found all over the Bible. However, I shall restrict myself to a few verses from Isaiah 53 in the interests of time and space.

First, that our Lord suffered in our place: 'But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed.' It was not for His own sins, but for ours that He suffered, and by that suffering we have peace with God.

Second, that our sins were laid upon Him. 'We all like sheep have gone astray; we have turned, every one of us, to his own way; and the LORD has laid on Him [or 'caused to land on Him'] the iniquity of us all.' Note who it is that laid our sins upon the Lord Jesus.

Thirdly, that it was none other than God Himself who afflicted the Lord Jesus with all these punishments. 'Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief.' It will not do to say that wicked men killed the Lord Jesus. The verse very clearly says that it was Yahweh Himself. Moreover, our Lord Himself says in John 10:18, "No one takes My life from Me [What? Not Herod, Pilate, the chief priests or whoever? No!], but I lay it down of Myself." It is all of God, Father, Son and Spirit, from first to last.

 

Because t don't have the time to lay out all of the arguments. Others have done a much better job, and I follow and agree with their defense, so I link to it. Most of my posts are 1-2 minutes in typing, in between refreshing reports at work.

 

You have crossed the line. I feel like I should make a citizen's arrest --as if that could be a thing in Christian circles. How in the world could you say such sinful things? If your elders could hear you say such things --would they be okay with it? There are two possibilities "Sure, what JonC has said is fine with us." That would mean your local assembly is outside the bounds. Or, your elders could give you church discipline. Not many churches do that these days unfortunately.

 

I also believe you have gone too far in your desire to promote your view that was found lacking by most of the Reformers.