A defense of the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement

[JonC]

This is an opportunity for those interested to defend the Theory of Penal Substitution rather than hijack other threads.

 

[JonC]

The challenge I had issued against the Theory is that it often assumes divine justice to be a specific type of justice without justifying or proving that presupposition. Unlike other forms of justice, the Theory of Penal Substitution holds that God cannot forgive sin except on the condition that divine justice be satisfied by punishing sin.

A better understanding would probably be that the Theory holds God forgives sin through meeting the condition that divine justice demands (thereby God proves to be both just and the justifier of sinners). But the contention was if it was appropriate to assume that model of justice as divine justice.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Romans 3:24-26. '....Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, [also] to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus.'

That's all there is to it really. God could not justly forgive the sins of the O.T. saints, and nor could He forgive the sins of N.T. Christians unless justice was satisfied. The good news is that it has been satisfied by Christ. Praise God!

 

[JonC]

Romans 3:24-26. '....Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, [also] to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus.'

That's all there is to it really. God could not justly forgive the sins of the O.T. saints, and nor could He forgive the sins of N.T. Christians unless justice was satisfied. The good news is that it has been satisfied by Christ. Praise God!

But the passage you present does not say that God could not forgive sins unless justice is satisfied. Countless Christian's have read and studied those words without coming to your conclusion.

Why do you believe the Theory of Penal Substitution developed around retributive justice which would make the passage mean that God has to punish sin in order to forgive sin?

Could you explain the reasoning?

Thanks

JonC