-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
It is not theory. So what and how should . . . be called?
- Thread starter 37818
- Start date
That is a topic for another thread.
In short (not to be dismissive) the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement is not "the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all".
I do not know of a Christian who denies Isaiah 53:6. God laying the inquity of us all on the Son of Man is an important truth of our faith. The Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement is not.
Start a thread if you want to journey down that well worn path. It'd be déjà vu all over again
37818
Well-Known Member
Is not theory.
Lol....good example of intellectual dishonesty. I never said that God laying the iniquity of us all on Jesus was a theory.
Penal Substitution Theory is one of several theories of Atonement.
Here is a short list of the most common:
Ransom Theory of Atonement (Christus Victor)
Substitution Theory of Atonement
Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement
Moral Influence Theory of Atonement
Government Theory of Atonement
Recapitulation
Some of the theories can, and have been, combined. The most obvious is Recaputulation and Moral Influence.
Some, like the Substitution Theory and Penal Substitution Theory, are exclusive because of the framework in which the Atonement is viewed.
Most Christians hold one Theory but accept parts of other theories. For example, those who hold Penal Substitution Theory also accept that Jesus is our moral example. BUT they do not accept the Moral Influence Theory.
Likewise, those who hold Christus Victor recognize Christ as taking a punishment for us (to redeem man). BUT they do not accept the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement.
Reading this (again) I should have been clearer.
I was speaking of the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement (that God punished Jesus instead of punishing us type of thing).
You asked a more simple question - Why is "penal substitution" not a truthful discription of "the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all" in Isaiah 53:6.
The reason penal substitution is not a truthful discription of the verse is that the verse does not indicate a substitution (as commonly used...."instead of") or a punishment (penal) aspect.
It is implied from other passages that there is what some have called "representative substitution" (Jesus as "the Son of Man", Jesus as the "Second Adam"), but that commonly referred to today as "representation". The verse itself does not indicate substitution (the difference is Christ died for our sins" vs "Christ died for our sins instead of us". One excludes us while the other is a type of solidarity with man).
There is also a penal aspect implied in the sense that the wages of sin is death, but this is a penalty or consequence rather than a punishment. A punishment is implied in Isaiah 53, however it is a punishment wrought by the hands of wicked men by the will of God rather than divine punishment.
The problem with using "penal substitution" in this context is that it is too easily confused with the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement (as evidenced by the fact you confused my statement about the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement with Isaiah 53).
37818
Well-Known Member
I do not believe in any atonement theories.
I believe Jesus received payment, per Romans 6:23, explaining, ". . . For the wages of sin is death; . . ."
And Jesus completed this prior to John 19:28, per ". . . Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, . . ." Which Jesus declared prior to His physical death, per John 19:30, "It is finished."
I believe Jesus received payment, per Romans 6:23, explaining, ". . . For the wages of sin is death; . . ."
And Jesus completed this prior to John 19:28, per ". . . Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, . . ." Which Jesus declared prior to His physical death, per John 19:30, "It is finished."
Good.
But that is where using "penal substitution" is problematic. It would be like me using "Christus victor" to simply mean Christ is victorious.
When most see "penal substitution" they connect it to the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement. So they would assign to you beliefs unique to that Theory, like God punishing Jesus, Jesus dying instead of us, and such.
The use of "substitution" is also theoretical (it originated with the Roman Catholic Church and was passed down to a sect of Reformers who refined it to suit their theory....biblically it would be "representation"....like "the Son of Man and "Second Adam"). It leads to the error that Christ's suffering was instead of us rather than solidarity.
While I am glad that you reject the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement, I strongly suggest using another term to express your view. That way you wouldn't be saddled with unbiblical beliefs you reject.
37818
Well-Known Member
What is your source?
37818
Well-Known Member
What terminology would that be?
Ezekiel 18:4, . . . the soul that sinneth, it shall die.
Isaiah 53:6, . . . and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
Matthew 27:46, . . . Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
Isaiah 53:12, . . . he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, . . .
John 19:28, . . . Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, . . .
I am not sure what term would be best. But using an already established term can only lead to confusion.
Part of discussing our faith is choosing words and terms that communicate what we believe.
You said that you do not believe the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement. But most simply shorten that to "Penal "Substitution".
Also, "penal substitution" is a theoretical term - a type of substitution (it isnt two words mashed together).
Since you reject the theoretical parts (penal in the sense that God punished Christ and substitution in the sense this was our punishment towards Christ instead of towards us) "penal substitution" is a poor choice.
I say this especially since the verses you provide contain neither penal or substitution, much less penal substitution.
How about "redemption"?
Alan Gross
Well-Known Member
SOURCE: 19th Century Occult Revival by Dr. Barbara Aho.
"The Society for Psychical Research is still active in London and is also accessible on the Internet. Current publications offered by the S.P.R.
to interested seekers include:
"Hints On Sitting With Mediums;
Tests For Extrasensory Perception and Psychokinesis;
Trance Mediumship: An Introductory Study of Mrs. Piper and Mrs Leonard;
Guide to the Investigation of Apparitions, Hauntings,
Poltergeists and Kindred Phenomena;
Psychical Research Past and Present;
Survival: A Reconsideration, Do We Survive Bodily Death?
Parapsychology and the UFO . . ." Society for Psychical Research,
49 Marloes Rd., Kensington, London W8 6LA,
http://moebius.psy.ed.ac.uk/spr.html
There are several issues:
1. Penal Substitution is already taken. It would be like using Christus Victor because Christ was victorious without holding Christis Victor.
You use penal substitution but at the same time state you do not hold Penal Substitution or any of the Atonement theories to be correct.
2. Penal substitution is a philosophical term describing a tyoe of substitution (not "punishment and substitution").
3. Isaiah 53:6 speaks of God laying on Christ the iniquity of man, which in and of itself is not penal substitution, punishment, or substitution.
4. Although you reject the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement, that is not communicated by saying you believe penal substitution. We are called to speak plainly and many would rightly say you would be using "double speak" to both affirm penal substitution (your beliefs) while denying penal substitution (the penal substitution theory of Atonement).
Alan Gross
Well-Known Member
"The Ultimate Object of the Cross is God Himself".
from: Penal Substitution and Other Atonement Theologies.
by STEPHEN WELLUM.
In THE PENAL (SUBSTITUTIONARY PROPITIATIONARY)
SATISFACTION ATONEMENT (THEOLOGY VIEW);
"The Triune God, in His Son, is taking His Own Demand on Himself
so that we, in Christ, may be Justified before Him (Rom. 5:1–2)."
WE MUST SEE;
that: The Primary Person we have sinned against is God,
and as such,
"The Ultimate Object of the Cross is God Himself."
...
"The Bible’s Presentation of the Cross is rich and multifaceted.
It is like a beautiful gem that can be looked at from many angles.
"Yet, the explanation of The Cross’s Central Means is that
Christ Jesus has come as our Mediator and New Covenant Head
to Offer Himself before God on behalf of sin.
"Penal Substitution best accounts for:
"Why the Divine Son had to Die,
"and Why He Alone Saves.
"With Paul, may we alone glory in and may,
"we preach Christ crucified".
(1 Cor. 1:23)."
"Various Atonement Theologies
emphasize many Biblical Truths and entailments of the cross,
"but unlike Penal Substitution, they fail to grasp;
"The Central Problem that the Cross Remedies,
namely, our sin before God."
...
Last edited:
Alan Gross
Well-Known Member
from: Penal Substitution and Other Atonement Theologies.
by STEPHEN WELLUM.
"Every view of the Atonement stresses
something true about the cross.
"Recapitulation rightly grasps the Adam-Christ Relationship
across Redemptive History (Rom. 5:12–21).
"In the first Adam, God Demanded Covenantal Obedience,
yet sadly, Adam disobeyed
and brought sin and death into the world.
"What is needed is The Incarnation of God’s Son, the last Adam,
to Live and die for us, and thus restore us
to the Purpose of our Creation (Heb. 2:5–18).
"Yet, this Recapitulation view does not emphasize enough
"that God requires Perfect Covenantal Obedience from us,
"AND the need for Christ to be our Representative in life
and Penal Substitute in death.
"It rightly stresses many Biblical Truths,
but fails to grasp adequately The God-law-sin Relationship."
...
"Similarly, Christus Victor emphasizes many Glorious Truths.
"It underscores the need for the Son to become human
to crush Satan’s head (Gen. 3:15)"
"and to defeat sin (Heb. 9:26)"
"and death (Rom. 6:9)."
"Yet, this Christus Victor view does not
make central the God-law-sin Relationship.
"In Scripture, the Powers of sin, Death, and Satan
are only over us because of our sin before God
(Gen. 2:17; Rom. 6:23; Heb. 2:14–15).
"After all,
"Why did the Divine Son have to die to Defeat the Powers?
"Why not simply Exert His Divine Power
to defeat them without the cross?
"Scripture’s answer is clear:
it’s only when our sin is Paid for that the Powers are Destroyed
(Col. 2:13–15; 1 Cor. 15:55–57).
"This is why our greatest problem is not the powers against us,
but how we can stand Justified before God.
Christus Victor without Penal Substitution hangs in mid-air.
...
"Scripture also presents Christ and His cross
as The Supreme Moral Example of Love, Obedience, and Suffering
(John 13:12–17; Eph. 5:1–2, 25–27; Phil. 2:5–11; 1 Pet. 2:18–25).
"But the cross only functions this way,
"because of Who Dies and What He Achieves,
namely, The Full Penal Satisfaction
of God’s Holy Demand against our sin,
"which is the very Demonstration of Divine Love (1 John 4:7–10)."
"Also, it’s never enough for Christ merely to Identify with us
in His Incarnation and show us how to live.
"Solidarity is not Atonement; it is only the prerequisite.
"We need more than an Example to Redeem us.
"What we need is for The Divine Son to live and die for us.
"Our problem is not that we need a great teacher
to show us how to live.
"Our problem is sin before The Triune Holy God,
and this problem requires the Enfleshment of God’s Own Son
"to Live for us and to Die for us as our Penal Substitute.
"It is only as our Propitiatory Sacrifice that God’s Own
Righteous Demand is Fully Met,
"and only in Christ do we receive all
the Glorious Benefits of His New Covenant Work.
...
"Of all the Atonement views, only Penal Substitution
best captures the God-centered nature of the cross.
"The Alternatives either Minimize or Deny:
1) "That God’s Holy Justice is Essential to Him,"
2) "Why our sin is First against God (Ps. 51:4),"
and 3) "Why Christ as our Penal Substitute is Central to the Cross."
"Before we can speak of the Horizontal Results of the Cross
(e.g., Moral Example, Inter-Personal Reconciliation, etc.),
"We must first speak of the Vertical; namely:
"The Triune God, in His Son, taking His Own Demand on Himself
so that we, in Christ, may be Justified before Him (Rom. 5:1–2).
"The other views miss this point.
"For them, The Object of the Cross is either;
"our sin (forms of Recapitulation),
"or Satan (Ransom Theory),
"or the powers (forms of Christus Victor).
"But what they fail to see is that
The Primary Person we have sinned against is God,
"and as such, The Ultimate Object of the Cross is God Himself."
The Penal Substitution Theory and Satisfaction Theory are opposing theories.
Neither best accounts for what the Son had to do or why He alone saves. That claim is nonsense (adherence of any Theory hold that theirs best accounts for what the Son had to do and why He alone saves).
The primary difference between Satisfaction and Penal Substitution is the reason Christ had to die and substitution vs representation.
37818
Well-Known Member
How is being a representation not in any way a substitution?
37818
Well-Known Member
Not according to Jeremiah 31:34.
Alan Gross
Well-Known Member
He's talking about, if a person is lost,
for them to 'earn salvation by obedience to the law of God",
God would have to require Perfect Covenantal Obedience from them.
And that Perfect Covenantal Obedience would have to be maintained
without sinning against any point of the law, at any time in their life,
from their conception, until they died.
A created human being has to be Perfect to enter into Heaven.
And, God Runs Heaven.
A human soul would have to live their lifetime, Perfectly, like Jesus.
"For as many as are of the works of the law
are under the curse:
for it is written,
"Cursed is everyone
that continueth not in all things
which are written in the book of the law to do them."
A human soul would have to live their lifetime, Perfectly like Jesus,
AND REMAIN IN PERFECT OBEDIENCE TO:
"...not The Ceremonial Law,
which was abolished when this Covenant was made,"
"but rather" The Moral Law still in force,
which is a Transcript of The Nature and Will of God;
(The Ten Commandments, etc.)
and "was inscribed on Adam's heart in innocence;"
Paul speaks of that Moral Law of God that was placed into his soul,
in the Spiritual Regeneration of The New Birth;
22; "For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
25; "I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
So then with the mind, I myself serve the law of God;
This is "the" (Moral) "law of God" (25b, above),
"that is Reinscribed into the saved person's soul, in Regeneration;
"and hence regard is had to it by Regenerate persons,
in which lies part of their Conformity to Christ,"
like those in Corinth, who were,
"declared to be the epistle of Christ,"
"written...with the Spirit of the Living God..."
"in fleshy tables of the heart,"
i.e., II Corinthians 3:3; "Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared
to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us,
"written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the Living God;
not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart."
con't:
Alan Gross
Well-Known Member
But IN THE SOUL BEFORE SALVATION,
the Moral Law of God that was Implanted into Adam,
has been and "is greatly obliterated by sin,"
and even in the FLESH of the SAVED SOUL,
SIN IS STILL "WARRING" AGAINST THE SPIRIT
and this is called, "The Law of Sin"
that is "a Contrary Disposition" (or Opposite)
to" the Moral Law of God "now in man",
Then, as a saved soul, Paul says,
"with the flesh", he served, "the law of sin."
Romans 7:18;
"For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing:
"for to will is present with me;
but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19; "For the good that I would I do not:
but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20; "Now if I do that I would not,
it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21; "I find then a law, ("The Law of Sin")
"that, when I would do good,
"evil is present with me."
23; "But I see another law in my members, (...wait for it!...)
warring against the law of my mind,
and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin (there it is!)
which is in my members.
...
So, Jeremiah 31:34 is talking about after God has saved their soul
and "the" (Moral) "law of God" (25b),
is Reinscribed into the saved person's soul, in Regeneration,
God says, "they shall all know Me,..." (in the experience of salvation),
"for I Will Forgive their iniquity,
and I Will Remember their sin no more."
THIS IS WHERE WE HAVE:
when HE LIVED A PERFECT LIFE, in TOTAL RIGHTEOUSNESS
AND: Perfect Covenantal Obedience, WHICH GOD REQUIRED OF HIM,
SINCE GOD IS JUST, THEREFORE, HIS JUSTICE REQUIRES IT,
THEN, WE SEE JESUS'
IN PLACE OF, or IN THE STEAD OF, or AS THE SURETY FOR,
THE GUILTY SOUL WHOSE SIN HAD ETERNALLY OFFENDED GOD,
AND MADE SATISFACTION FOR THEIR SINS TO THE UTTERMOST,
That God could say, "they shall all know Me,..."
"for I Will Forgive their iniquity,
and I Will Remember their sin no more."
Paul put it like this: 24; "O wretched man that I am!
Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25; "I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God..."
Jesus is The Savior.
Jeremiah 31:34;
"And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor,
and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD:
"for they shall all know Me,
from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD;
"for I Will Forgive their iniquity,
and I Will Remember their sin no more."
Through The Blood Atonement of Jesus Christ.
New Thread:
Need a "TOPIC" to Preach on, tomorrow?
How about, "The Blood Atonement of Jesus Christ"?
the Moral Law of God that was Implanted into Adam,
has been and "is greatly obliterated by sin,"
and even in the FLESH of the SAVED SOUL,
SIN IS STILL "WARRING" AGAINST THE SPIRIT
and this is called, "The Law of Sin"
that is "a Contrary Disposition" (or Opposite)
to" the Moral Law of God "now in man",
Then, as a saved soul, Paul says,
"with the flesh", he served, "the law of sin."
Romans 7:18;
"For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing:
"for to will is present with me;
but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19; "For the good that I would I do not:
but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20; "Now if I do that I would not,
it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21; "I find then a law, ("The Law of Sin")
"that, when I would do good,
"evil is present with me."
23; "But I see another law in my members, (...wait for it!...)
warring against the law of my mind,
and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin (there it is!)
which is in my members.
...
So, Jeremiah 31:34 is talking about after God has saved their soul
and "the" (Moral) "law of God" (25b),
is Reinscribed into the saved person's soul, in Regeneration,
God says, "they shall all know Me,..." (in the experience of salvation),
"for I Will Forgive their iniquity,
and I Will Remember their sin no more."
THIS IS WHERE WE HAVE:
So, it is through Jesus Christ's Obedience to The Moral Law of God,
when HE LIVED A PERFECT LIFE, in TOTAL RIGHTEOUSNESS
AND: Perfect Covenantal Obedience, WHICH GOD REQUIRED OF HIM,
SINCE GOD IS JUST, THEREFORE, HIS JUSTICE REQUIRES IT,
THEN, WE SEE JESUS'
IN JESUS' ATONEMENT, HE SACRIFICED HIS PERFECT LIFE,
IN PLACE OF, or IN THE STEAD OF, or AS THE SURETY FOR,
THE GUILTY SOUL WHOSE SIN HAD ETERNALLY OFFENDED GOD,
AND MADE SATISFACTION FOR THEIR SINS TO THE UTTERMOST,
That God could say, "they shall all know Me,..."
"for I Will Forgive their iniquity,
and I Will Remember their sin no more."
Paul put it like this: 24; "O wretched man that I am!
Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25; "I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God..."
Jesus is The Savior.
Jeremiah 31:34;
"And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor,
and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD:
"for they shall all know Me,
from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD;
"for I Will Forgive their iniquity,
and I Will Remember their sin no more."
Through The Blood Atonement of Jesus Christ.
New Thread:
Need a "TOPIC" to Preach on, tomorrow?
How about, "The Blood Atonement of Jesus Christ"?