Arthur King
Active Member
“Surely our griefs He Himself bore,
And our sorrows He carried;
Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten of God, and afflicted.
But He was pierced through for our transgressions,
He was crushed for our iniquities;
The chastening for our well-being upon Him,
And by His scourging we are healed.”
Let's make sure we define penal substitution. Penal (as in penalty) substitution is the idea that, to quote a popular hymn, “On that cross as Jesus died, the wrath of God was satisfied.” On the cross “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.” (Pierced for Our Transgressions). The idea is that humanity’s sin against God deserves the eternal outpouring of God’s wrath (hell), and He must execute this punishment in order to be a perfectly just God. So, in order to save humanity, God becomes human in the person of Jesus Christ and suffers the divine wrath in our place for our sins as our substitute. On penal substitution, salvation is not primarily from sin, or Satan, or ourselves, but from God Himself.
As popular theologian RC Sproul says:
My sin was placed upon him. And the one who was pure was pure no more. And God cursed him. It was as if there was a cry from heaven — excuse my language, but I can be no more accurate than to say — It was as if Jesus heard the words, ”God damn you.” Because that’s what it meant to be cursed. To be damned. To be under the anathema of the Father.
In sum, penal substitution requires at least two things (1) that Jesus’ death is just, or deserved, that is, to satisfy the wrath of God, to satisfy the retributive demands of God’s justice, and (2) that Jesus dies in our place, as our substitute, taking the punishment upon himself so we won't have to suffer it.
Three comments on Isaiah 53 to show why it doesn't support penal substitution:
First, it is clear from the immediate context, the sacrificial context, and from the commentary on the passage in 1 Peter 2 that the Servant is suffering unjustly, not justly. Concerning the immediate context of Isaiah 53, the prophet makes it clear that the Suffering Servant is “despised and forsaken by men” (v.3), and “they made [the Servant’s] grave with the wicked . . . although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth.” These verses make it clear that the Servant was unjustly killed. Concerning the sacrificial context of Isaiah 53, verse 10 says that the Servant was “made a guilt offering.” Recall that a guilt offering is a ritual in which an unblemished animal is killed by a guilty sinner (Lev 5:6). The Servant, also, is a perfectly innocent life that is killed by guilty sinners. Notice that Isaiah 53 is the go-to passage for encouraging people who are unjustly suffering. 1 Peter 2 is the longest NT commentary on Isaiah 53, and it says:
“Servants, be submissive to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and gentle, but also to those who are unreasonable. For this finds grace, if for the sake of conscience toward God a person bears up under sorrows when suffering unjustly. For what credit is there if, when you sin and are harshly treated, you endure it with patience? But if when you do what is right and suffer for it you patiently endure it, this finds grace with God.
For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps, Who committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in his mouth; and while being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously; and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed.”
Again, it is clear from the immediate context, the sacrificial context, and from the commentary in 1 Peter 2 that the Suffering Servant is suffering unjustly, not justly. What is it that finds grace with God? When “for the sake of conscience toward God a person bears up under sorrows when suffering unjustly (v.19).” It was Jesus’ unjust suffering on the cross that found grace with God to save the whole world.
Second, let’s pay close attention the logic of Isaiah 53:5, that “by his scourging we are healed.” The logic of Penalty Substitution is “Jesus suffered the punishment for our sins in our place so that we would not have to suffer that punishment.” In the language of Isaiah 53, this would be translated “Jesus was wounded so that we would avoid being wounded.” But this is not what Isaiah 53 says. The text says, “By his scourging we are healed,” NOT, “By his scourging we avoid being scourged.” The logic of Isaiah 53 actually runs, “He was wounded so that we could be healed from our wounds.” The suffering servant is wounded so that those who are wounded (by sin) can be healed. Jesus is wounded for our transgressions so that our wounds can be healed by the power of his resurrection. Again, Jesus does not die so that we will not have to die, but Jesus dies so that the dead can die and rise in Him.
Third, many Penal Substitution advocates will cite that Jesus was “smitten of God (v.4)” and “the Lord was pleased to crush him (v.7).” But recall that God’s act of “crushing” people can refer to two different things, both (a) the just punishment of the guilty, or (b) the unjust persecution of the innocent. See Psalm 44, in which the Psalmist says, “Our heart has not turned back, and our steps have not deviated from Your way, yet You have crushed us in a place of jackals (referring to foreign nations) and covered us with the shadow of death (v.18-19).” The Psalmist says that God is crushing him, rejecting him, dishonoring him (v.9), yet he is innocent, so he is clearly referring to unjust persecution at the hands of the wicked, not just punishment at the hands of the righteous, when he says so. Therefore, references to God “striking” and “crushing” the suffering servant fail to show that the suffering servant is justly suffering or “satisfying the wrath” of God. Isaiah 53 is about an innocent person who is crushed by God as he willingly suffers the unjust persecution of wicked humans.
Here is how the atonement actually works, when properly formulated around the injustice of Jesus' death. See this quotation from Caesarius of Arles in the 6th century:
Let us see what the cross might want from itself, how the sin of the world is remitted upon it, how death is destroyed and the Devil triumphed over. The cross is certainly not deserved, insofar as it pertains to the form of justice, unless by sinners; for both the law of God and of the world is recognized to have decreed the cross for guilty men and criminals alone. Therefore with the Devil hurrying about working through Judas, through the kings of the earth and through the princes of the Jews, who “came together as one” to Pilate “against the Lord and against his Christ,” Christ was condemned to death; an innocent man was condemned just as the prophet says in the Psalm: “But the righteous man, what has he done?” And again, “They will seek against the spirit of the righteous and will condemn innocent blood;” the man guilty of not even a trivial sin is condemned, since the serpent was able to leave no trace in this rock. He patiently endured both insults and blows, the thorny crown and scarlet robe, and the other mockeries which are contained in the Gospel. He endured this without any guilt, so that filled with patience, as “a sheep to the sacrifice,” he might come to the cross. He received this in a dignified manner who would have been able to inflict injury upon his enemies . . . But he fulfills the mystery of the cross, for which purpose he also came into this world; so that by means of the cross, by means of a salvific justice and reason, the note of our indebtedness to sin might be canceled, the enemy power be captured after being enticed by the bait of the cross and the Devil lose the prey he used to hold.
Now, it is necessary for this to be believed to have been done in this way. Christ the Lord without any guilt, without any blame, underwent a penal sentence; the innocent man is crucified without sin. The Devil is made guilty by the death of an innocent man; the Devil is made guilty by bringing the cross upon a righteous man who owed nothing . . . “You are no longer able to hold man in endless death, for he conquered, overcame and crushed you through me. You were not truly conquered through power, but by justice; not by domination, by rather by equity.” Thus the Enemy vomited up what he had gulped down and justly there was taken away from him what he used to hold, since unjustly he dared to infringe upon that which under no arrangement was his concern.
Again, Caesarius says that Jesus underwent a “penal sentence,” but he hammers the point that Jesus suffered this penal sentence unjustly as an innocent person.
And our sorrows He carried;
Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten of God, and afflicted.
But He was pierced through for our transgressions,
He was crushed for our iniquities;
The chastening for our well-being upon Him,
And by His scourging we are healed.”
Let's make sure we define penal substitution. Penal (as in penalty) substitution is the idea that, to quote a popular hymn, “On that cross as Jesus died, the wrath of God was satisfied.” On the cross “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.” (Pierced for Our Transgressions). The idea is that humanity’s sin against God deserves the eternal outpouring of God’s wrath (hell), and He must execute this punishment in order to be a perfectly just God. So, in order to save humanity, God becomes human in the person of Jesus Christ and suffers the divine wrath in our place for our sins as our substitute. On penal substitution, salvation is not primarily from sin, or Satan, or ourselves, but from God Himself.
As popular theologian RC Sproul says:
My sin was placed upon him. And the one who was pure was pure no more. And God cursed him. It was as if there was a cry from heaven — excuse my language, but I can be no more accurate than to say — It was as if Jesus heard the words, ”God damn you.” Because that’s what it meant to be cursed. To be damned. To be under the anathema of the Father.
In sum, penal substitution requires at least two things (1) that Jesus’ death is just, or deserved, that is, to satisfy the wrath of God, to satisfy the retributive demands of God’s justice, and (2) that Jesus dies in our place, as our substitute, taking the punishment upon himself so we won't have to suffer it.
Three comments on Isaiah 53 to show why it doesn't support penal substitution:
First, it is clear from the immediate context, the sacrificial context, and from the commentary on the passage in 1 Peter 2 that the Servant is suffering unjustly, not justly. Concerning the immediate context of Isaiah 53, the prophet makes it clear that the Suffering Servant is “despised and forsaken by men” (v.3), and “they made [the Servant’s] grave with the wicked . . . although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth.” These verses make it clear that the Servant was unjustly killed. Concerning the sacrificial context of Isaiah 53, verse 10 says that the Servant was “made a guilt offering.” Recall that a guilt offering is a ritual in which an unblemished animal is killed by a guilty sinner (Lev 5:6). The Servant, also, is a perfectly innocent life that is killed by guilty sinners. Notice that Isaiah 53 is the go-to passage for encouraging people who are unjustly suffering. 1 Peter 2 is the longest NT commentary on Isaiah 53, and it says:
“Servants, be submissive to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and gentle, but also to those who are unreasonable. For this finds grace, if for the sake of conscience toward God a person bears up under sorrows when suffering unjustly. For what credit is there if, when you sin and are harshly treated, you endure it with patience? But if when you do what is right and suffer for it you patiently endure it, this finds grace with God.
For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps, Who committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in his mouth; and while being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously; and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed.”
Again, it is clear from the immediate context, the sacrificial context, and from the commentary in 1 Peter 2 that the Suffering Servant is suffering unjustly, not justly. What is it that finds grace with God? When “for the sake of conscience toward God a person bears up under sorrows when suffering unjustly (v.19).” It was Jesus’ unjust suffering on the cross that found grace with God to save the whole world.
Second, let’s pay close attention the logic of Isaiah 53:5, that “by his scourging we are healed.” The logic of Penalty Substitution is “Jesus suffered the punishment for our sins in our place so that we would not have to suffer that punishment.” In the language of Isaiah 53, this would be translated “Jesus was wounded so that we would avoid being wounded.” But this is not what Isaiah 53 says. The text says, “By his scourging we are healed,” NOT, “By his scourging we avoid being scourged.” The logic of Isaiah 53 actually runs, “He was wounded so that we could be healed from our wounds.” The suffering servant is wounded so that those who are wounded (by sin) can be healed. Jesus is wounded for our transgressions so that our wounds can be healed by the power of his resurrection. Again, Jesus does not die so that we will not have to die, but Jesus dies so that the dead can die and rise in Him.
Third, many Penal Substitution advocates will cite that Jesus was “smitten of God (v.4)” and “the Lord was pleased to crush him (v.7).” But recall that God’s act of “crushing” people can refer to two different things, both (a) the just punishment of the guilty, or (b) the unjust persecution of the innocent. See Psalm 44, in which the Psalmist says, “Our heart has not turned back, and our steps have not deviated from Your way, yet You have crushed us in a place of jackals (referring to foreign nations) and covered us with the shadow of death (v.18-19).” The Psalmist says that God is crushing him, rejecting him, dishonoring him (v.9), yet he is innocent, so he is clearly referring to unjust persecution at the hands of the wicked, not just punishment at the hands of the righteous, when he says so. Therefore, references to God “striking” and “crushing” the suffering servant fail to show that the suffering servant is justly suffering or “satisfying the wrath” of God. Isaiah 53 is about an innocent person who is crushed by God as he willingly suffers the unjust persecution of wicked humans.
Here is how the atonement actually works, when properly formulated around the injustice of Jesus' death. See this quotation from Caesarius of Arles in the 6th century:
Let us see what the cross might want from itself, how the sin of the world is remitted upon it, how death is destroyed and the Devil triumphed over. The cross is certainly not deserved, insofar as it pertains to the form of justice, unless by sinners; for both the law of God and of the world is recognized to have decreed the cross for guilty men and criminals alone. Therefore with the Devil hurrying about working through Judas, through the kings of the earth and through the princes of the Jews, who “came together as one” to Pilate “against the Lord and against his Christ,” Christ was condemned to death; an innocent man was condemned just as the prophet says in the Psalm: “But the righteous man, what has he done?” And again, “They will seek against the spirit of the righteous and will condemn innocent blood;” the man guilty of not even a trivial sin is condemned, since the serpent was able to leave no trace in this rock. He patiently endured both insults and blows, the thorny crown and scarlet robe, and the other mockeries which are contained in the Gospel. He endured this without any guilt, so that filled with patience, as “a sheep to the sacrifice,” he might come to the cross. He received this in a dignified manner who would have been able to inflict injury upon his enemies . . . But he fulfills the mystery of the cross, for which purpose he also came into this world; so that by means of the cross, by means of a salvific justice and reason, the note of our indebtedness to sin might be canceled, the enemy power be captured after being enticed by the bait of the cross and the Devil lose the prey he used to hold.
Now, it is necessary for this to be believed to have been done in this way. Christ the Lord without any guilt, without any blame, underwent a penal sentence; the innocent man is crucified without sin. The Devil is made guilty by the death of an innocent man; the Devil is made guilty by bringing the cross upon a righteous man who owed nothing . . . “You are no longer able to hold man in endless death, for he conquered, overcame and crushed you through me. You were not truly conquered through power, but by justice; not by domination, by rather by equity.” Thus the Enemy vomited up what he had gulped down and justly there was taken away from him what he used to hold, since unjustly he dared to infringe upon that which under no arrangement was his concern.
Again, Caesarius says that Jesus underwent a “penal sentence,” but he hammers the point that Jesus suffered this penal sentence unjustly as an innocent person.
