Penal Substitution Atonement Theory

[JonC]

That atonement view best explains just how a Holy God is able to stay Holy and true to His very nature and still be able to freely justify lost sinners!

I agree the Penal Substitution Theory does explain how God could remain holy yet justify sinners, but I disagree that it is the best or most biblical explanation.

 

[5 point Gillinist]

Yes.

The law is powerless to redeem. (Romans)

Correct, it reflects God's Holy nature.

The law is not opposed to God. (Galatians)

Correct, as does the whole Mosaic law, sacrifices, etc. The Law points out our inability to live a perfectly obedient life, it points out our sin, and absolute need of a savior to rescue us from God's just wrath against all law breakers.

The law points to Christ. (Romans)

Correct, Christ made payment to God the lawgiver on our behalf. Colossians 2:13-14, Isaiah 53:5-6.

Christ made no payment to the law.

No. But I'd be interested to hear your opinion on why you think this.

Certainly, PSA theory does void the trinity, or Christ was not in hypostatic Union which makes the crucifixion void.

 

[JesusFan]

Not exactly.

Mankind is already condemned. They owe God nothing accept obedience and honor. That is what the law demanded.

That mankind will be blessed with wrath that is not appointed to the believers is because of the treatment of the ungodly toward the Godly.

Because the PSA, Substitution, and Late Ransom thinking come from the RC, the schooling and bent implanted into the reformers obliged them to consider some legal means of redemption. It just isn't consistent with the Scriptures in so many ways.

Jesus and the Apostles went went back to the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53, which is psa!

 

[JesusFan]

I agree the Penal Substitution Theory does explain how God could remain holy yet justify sinners, but I disagree that it is the best or most biblical explanation.

What other way then allows God to Justify lost sinners and to remain Holy then?

 

[agedman]

Jesus and the Apostles went went back to the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53, which is psa!

It is also part of Ransom, Substitute and Victorious theories.

 

[JesusFan]

At no point does the Scriptures present that some payment would absolve God’s law.

The law is powerless to redeem. (Romans)

The law is not opposed to God. (Galatians)

The law points to Christ. (Romans)

Christ made no payment to the law.

Certainly, PSA theory does void the trinity, or Christ was not in hypostatic Union which makes the crucifixion void.

Jesus was and is Fully God and Man, and yet in his humanity sufferred and experienced for our sale what lost sinners will in final judgement!

 

[agedman]

...
Correct, Christ made payment to God the lawgiver on our behalf. Colossians 2:13-14, Isaiah 53:5-6.

There is nothing that I found in Scripture that Christ paid anyone for anything.

The Rev. shows the slain lamb taking the scroll from the hand of God. But there is no mention of God offering Him the Scroll.

Such is a display of not only the Authority of Christ, but that authority extends to all matters in heaven and earth.

No. But I'd be interested to hear your opinion on why you think this.

Christ fulfilled the Law concerning the sacrifice and offerings necessary for cleansing, purification, and communication with God. When the veil was ripped the opening to "boldly enter" and appeal to the God of all Heaven and Earth was established.

Christ did not buy this privilege but was given as recorded in Matthew 28:18.

 

[agedman]

Jesus was and is Fully God and Man, and yet in his humanity sufferred and experienced for our sale what lost sinners will in final judgement!

How do you know?

Is there a Scripture verse that says this, or is this the produce of teaching.

The difficulty is that one cannot separate the human and the God from Christ. He was indivisible.

When the typical torture was applied, it was not just to human but to God.

When the fleshly body died, just as man, His spirit continued on to Abraham's Bosom. As validated by the statement made to the thief.

When He resurrected, He remained in the body and still does bearing the scars.

Christ did not suffer for as lost sinners will in the final judgement.

The final judgment brings the second death. Christ did not die twice.

 

[agedman]

I would again remind folks reading the thread that the crucifixion was not something unusual done to the Christ. It was a common form of torturous Roman death penalty.

It is the same with the agonizing torture the Christ endured. It was not unusual for prison interrogation techniques to be extremely harsh and punitive.

However, do not get in your mind that in some manner this then diminishes that which the Christ did. It does not.

Rather, it is hoped that the focus will shift from that suffering to the glory of the one suffering.

For as the Apostle said concerning this:

...that I may gain Christ 9and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ,a the righteousness from God on the basis of faith. 10I want to know Christ and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to Him in His death, 11and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead.​

 

[JonC]

What other way then allows God to Justify lost sinners and to remain Holy then?

IMHO the Early Church had the best understanding of this issue.

Men are condemned because of sin, and the wages of sin is death. Men must die to the flesh and be made alive in Christ (in Whom there is no condemnation). God does not undue the wages of sin (all flesh must die). God is Just. But God recreates men in Christ. God is the Justifier of sinners.

 

[JesusFan]

There is nothing that I found in Scripture that Christ paid anyone for anything.

The Rev. shows the slain lamb taking the scroll from the hand of God. But there is no mention of God offering Him the Scroll.

Such is a display of not only the Authority of Christ, but that authority extends to all matters in heaven and earth.



Christ fulfilled the Law concerning the sacrifice and offerings necessary for cleansing, purification, and communication with God. When the veil was ripped the opening to "boldly enter" and appeal to the God of all Heaven and Earth was established.

Christ did not buy this privilege but was given as recorded in Matthew 28:18.

Jesus died as One who bore and took the due penalty we deserved as being sinners!

 

[JesusFan]

IMHO the Early Church had the best understanding of this issue.

Men are condemned because of sin, and the wages of sin is death. Men must die to the flesh and be made alive in Christ (in Whom there is no condemnation). God does not undue the wages of sin (all flesh must die). God is Just. But God recreates men in Christ. God is the Justifier of sinners.

He can ONLY justify due to Jesus paying the sin obligation owed by us, as one must take His wrath and judgement for our sake in order to have Him able to justify us and stay still Holy!

 

[JonC]

I would again remind folks reading the thread that the crucifixion was not something unusual done to the Christ. It was a common form of torturous Roman death penalty.

It is the same with the agonizing torture the Christ endured. It was not unusual for prison interrogation techniques to be extremely harsh and punitive.

However, do not get in your mind that in some manner this then diminishes that which the Christ did. It does not.

Rather, it is hoped that the focus will shift from that suffering to the glory of the one suffering.

For as the Apostle said concerning this:

...that I may gain Christ 9and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ,a the righteousness from God on the basis of faith. 10I want to know Christ and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to Him in His death, 11and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead.​

Not only that, but the Hebrews practiced crucifixion during the Hasmonean period.

 

[JonC]

He can ONLY justify due to Jesus paying the sin obligation owed by us, as one must take His wrath and judgement for our sake in order to have Him able to justify us and stay still Holy!

I understand this is what the Penal Substitution Theory demands of God. I am saying this is not biblical doctrine.

 

[Iconoclast]

Ip

Not so, my friend.

The PSA comes about in agreement with some because they desire some legal binding. But that isn't the Scripture.

The law was not legally binding, but a school master directing the attention to Christ.

God had no legal binding to redeem anyone, but that which He presented through the prophets that the messiah might be recognized and seen as different then any others. For many were the claims of being the Christ, even in this day.

What was the motivation of God?
John 3:16

As nice a verse as Jn.3:16 is...it is causing you to miss the clear teaching of scripture
GAL.4:4 -5 quickly dismisses you whole post.
The law has many purposes, it is a schoolmaster indeed, but gal4:4-5 speaks to redeem those who were under the law.
In fact law and gospel is the very heart of it.Without the perfect law keeping of the Lord Jesus Christ, the active and passive obedience of Jesus on behalf of the elect...there is no gospel.

 

[JonC]

Ip

As nice a verse as Jn.3:16 is...it is causing you to miss the clear teaching of scripture
GAL.4:4 -5 quickly dismisses you whole post.
The law has many purposes, it is a schoolmaster indeed, but gal4:4-5 speaks to redeem those who were under the law.
In fact law and gospel is the very heart of it.Without the perfect law keeping of the Lord Jesus Christ, the active and passive obedience of Jesus on behalf of the elect...there is no gospel.

I would say ypu may be missing an important aspect of the law. The law demands a physical death for transgressions (often spelling out how the transgressors is to die). The law is fulfilled in Christ, but it is not made void. We still must die.

The New Testament Church looked to deliverance from death - not that we do not die but that in dying we find life.

My point is you cannot argue Scripture in support of Penal Substitution Theory because those who disagree affirm the exact same passages. Yet the disagreement remains.

 

[Iconoclast]

We are saved by law keeping.
Not us keeping it.
Jesus kept it perfectly on behalf of the elect.
He died under the penalty of it....
Not just physical death but our spiritual death and alienation from God from our law breaking.
At the fall spiritual death and alienation took place that very instant with physical death to happen in the future.
In Christ the process is reversed.
We are given new hearts and and spiritual new birth,, with physical resurrection to happen in the future.

 

[JesusFan]

Not only that, but the Hebrews practiced crucifixion during the Hasmonean period.

The Cross though meant that Jesus was to be seen as being under the very curse of God due to the manner of his death!

 

[JesusFan]

I would say ypu may be missing an important aspect of the law. The law demands a physical death for transgressions (often spelling out how the transgressors is to die). The law is fulfilled in Christ, but it is not made void. We still must die.

The New Testament Church looked to deliverance from death - not that we do not die but that in dying we find life.

My point is you cannot argue Scripture in support of Penal Substitution Theory because those who disagree affirm the exact same passages. Yet the disagreement remains.

The father demands a death for breaking of His law and by sinning, and he also needs someone to bear the deserved and due wrath and condemnation for sinning

 

[DaveXR650]

But where I disagree with Penal Substitution Theory is I see this being "in our place" the same way Adam sinned "in our place" (as a representative).

I don't know if everyone uses the same terminology but do you know if that would be the "Recapitulation" theory from Irenaeus? Christ undoes the work of the first Adam and fulfills his commission representatively on our behalf?