Penal Substitution Theory

[agedman]

Who kills the victim in the sacrifice?

The high priest.

Is our Lord not referred to the high priest in Hebrews 5?

I lay my life down, I take it up again.

 

[JonC]

Well this is it, is it? Penal Substitution Lite? 'Mountains are in labour and a miserable mouse is born.'
I am pleased that you now admit that the Father forsook the Son, which is something you adamantly denied last time we locked horns. I am pleased also that you have adjusted your 'penal substitution theory' and are no longer insisting that PS declares that God was punishing Christ rather than punishing sin.
But what is missing from your PS Lite is God's requirement for propitiation, and the need for God's justice to be upheld, 'That He might be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus.' God's justice demands that sin must be punished, and so the Lord Jesus Christ, God incarnate, was made sin for us and suffered, willingly, the punishment and God's righteous anger against sin that we deserve.
And you still do not understand, or will not admit, that the Bible declares very clearly, both in type and in actuality that the Father struck the Son, putting Him to grief, 'I will strike the Shepherd........'

No. No Penal Substitution Theory at all. Just traditional Christianity (the faith delivered once to the saints).

Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd,
And against the man, My Associate,”
Declares the Lord of hosts. “Strike the Shepherd that the sheep may be scattered."

Yes, even the scattering was by God's will.

Are you shocked nothing takes God by surprise?

 

[JonC]

Well this is it, is it? Penal Substitution Lite? 'Mountains are in labour and a miserable mouse is born.'
I am pleased that you now admit that the Father forsook the Son, which is something you adamantly denied last time we locked horns. I am pleased also that you have adjusted your 'penal substitution theory' and are no longer insisting that PS declares that God was punishing Christ rather than punishing sin.
But what is missing from your PS Lite is God's requirement for propitiation, and the need for God's justice to be upheld, 'That He might be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus.' God's justice demands that sin must be punished, and so the Lord Jesus Christ, God incarnate, was made sin for us and suffered, willingly, the punishment and God's righteous anger against sin that we deserve.
And you still do not understand, or will not admit, that the Bible declares very clearly, both in type and in actuality that the Father struck the Son, putting Him to grief, 'I will strike the Shepherd........'

No. No Penal Substitution Theory at all. Just traditional Christianity (the faith delivered once to the saints).

Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd,
And against the man, My Associate,”
Declares the Lord of hosts. “Strike the Shepherd that the sheep may be scattered."

Yes, even the scattering was by God's will.

Are you shocked nothing takes God by surprise?

 

[JonC]

Paul and I agree that the preaching of the Cross is foolishness to them that perish.

I agree. But I would not go so far as to say the Penal Substitution Theorists are perishing. They think God's Word foolish in regards to the Atonement, so they write their own. But they are Christians. They are simply blinded by their own tradition.

 

[agedman]

I agree. But I would not go so far as to say the Penal Substitution Theorists are perishing. They think God's Word foolish in regards to the Atonement, so they write their own. But they are Christians. They are simply blinded by their own tradition.

Jon, did you notice the repeated posts?

I had that happen when the system was slower to respond and I hit post reply a few times in frustration.

 

[JonC]

Jon, did you notice the repeated posts?

I had that happen when the system was slower to respond and I hit post reply a few times in frustration.

Thanks. Headed back from Savannah GA and had slow service (wife is driving).

 

[Protestant]

Having studied this thread for some time in order to understand the outrageous positions taken by JonC and agedman, I can no longer remain silent.

I thank God for such stalwarts in the faith as iconoclast, Martin M and Aaron.

IMHO, I believe such statements as “Christ did not die to appease God. Christ died to appease the World” are not only God-dishonoring, but anti-Christian.

The world has never needed appeasing.

Appeasing what? Its thirst for blood? Its hatred of that which is good and holy?

It is our holy, righteous and just God who needs appeasing.

His divine and holy justice requires/demands satisfaction.

Christ alone satisfied, appeased, propitiated the vindicatory justice of God.

He did so through his active and passive obedience, from childhood through Calvary.

The OT animal sacrifices were shadows of Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross.

They were not sacrificed to appease the ‘World.’ They were continually sacrificed to temporarily appease the wrath of a holy God whose hatred of sin is so pronounced that He will not bestow forgiveness unless an appropriate punishment is rendered as payment for the sin.

Christ, the punished, was that payment. The bloody sacrifice of sinless man who is also infinite God was the only possible way to pay the infinite sin debt of God’s Elect.

Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors.

There is a sin debt owed God. It is not owed the world.

Our sin debt was paid in full by the blood of innocent Christ.

Luke 7 teaches the Parable of the Two Debtors. God is the creditor who can forgive debts, if He chooses. His forgiveness requires that Christ, our surety, pays in full our debt which, once satisfied, relieves us of payment.

But it is more complicated when the payment is made in blood, rather than currency. Blood signifies punishment by a torturous death.

It also signifies the unspeakable punishment due those who reject Christ as Lord and Savior.

To not believe the penal aspect of Christ’s bloody sacrifice is to elevate your wisdom above God’s.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.

 

[Aaron]

The high priest.

On the day of Atonement, but the rest of the time, just the priest.

The offering, as Christ, is killed. The priest, as YHWH, does the killing. It's there. You can't argue with it.

 

[Protestant]

On the day of Atonement, but the rest of the time, just the priest.

The offering, as Christ, is killed. The priest, as YHWH, does the killing.

So true. We also have the sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham, a type of the God the Father sacrificing His Son, Jesus.

 

[agedman]

On the day of Atonement, but the rest of the time, just the priest.

The offering, as Christ, is killed. The priest, as YHWH, does the killing. It's there. You can't argue with it.

Not completely the scriptural accounting, Aaron.

Christ is both high priest, the sacrificial lamb and the scapegoat. He is not just the just one but the justifier.

He is the propitiation and the alter of propitiation.

He is both the light and light giver, the water of life and life itself.

He is both priest and King, the sacrificed lamb and high priest.

These are not divisible into time compartments as some might desire that it fit some scheme of atonement.

 

[agedman]

So true. We also have the sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham, a type of the God the Father sacrificing His Son, Jesus.

But he really didn’t did he.

God provided the Lamb, and humankind did the sacrificing.

 

[agedman]

Having studied this thread for some time in order to understand the outrageous positions taken by JonC and agedman, I can no longer remain silent.

Why have you remained silent, you were welcome to participate at anytime.

I thank God for such stalwarts in the faith as iconoclast, Martin M and Aaron.

IMHO, I believe such statements as “Christ did not die to appease God. Christ died to appease the World” are not only God-dishonoring, but anti-Christian.

The world has never needed appeasing.

Are you suggesting that John 3:16 does not pertain to all the world?

Appeasing what? Its thirst for blood? Its hatred of that which is good and holy?

It is our holy, righteous and just God who needs appeasing.

His divine and holy justice requires/demands satisfaction.

Christ alone satisfied, appeased, propitiated the vindicatory justice of God.

He did so through his active and passive obedience, from childhood through Calvary.

And this has been opposed? Not by Jon or by me.

The OT animal sacrifices were shadows of Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross.

They were not sacrificed to appease the ‘World.’ They were continually sacrificed to temporarily appease the wrath of a holy God whose hatred of sin is so pronounced that He will not bestow forgiveness unless an appropriate punishment is rendered as payment for the sin.

Christ, the punished, was that payment. The bloody sacrifice of sinless man who is also infinite God was the only possible way to pay the infinite sin debt of God’s Elect.

1) You have a far to narrow consideration of the atonement. It was more than humanity at stake, and all creation was involved.
2) The OT atonement service was for all in the land including strangers and servants. Just as our Lord’s was the atonement for all His realm of all heavens and earth.
3) You engage legal philosophy arguments of which some payment was demanded, yet neglect to state to whom such payment was to be made, nor that such payment is not mentioned in Scriptures as necessary for atonement. You

Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors.

There is a sin debt owed God. It is not owed the world.

Our sin debt was paid in full by the blood of innocent Christ.

Luke 7 teaches the Parable of the Two Debtors. God is the creditor who can forgive debts, if He chooses. His forgiveness requires that Christ, our surety, pays in full our debt which, once satisfied, relieves us of payment.

But it is more complicated when the payment is made in blood, rather than currency. Blood signifies punishment by a torturous death.

It also signifies the unspeakable punishment due those who reject Christ as Lord and Savior.

To not believe the penal aspect of Christ’s bloody sacrifice is to elevate your wisdom above God’s.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.

I am struggling to clarify your statements to make some response. That is not your fault but that of my own frailty and health.

Perhaps if you will look at your statement that God is as a creditor…

Where can you point this out specifically in Scripture?

God’s response to those who do not believe is that they are already condemned, not because of sin(s) but because their names were not written in the book of life.

Perhaps I can better attend to this tomorrow.

 

[Iconoclast]

agedman,

[QUOTE]What does Romans 8 declare?[/QUOTE]

PSA...I will show you

1Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2For in Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set you free from the law of sin and death. 3For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful man, as an offering for sin.

God sent Jesus as an offering....The Lamb of God....Our Passover

​

[QUOTE]Because of God sending the Son, as an offering for sin, Christ condemned sin, [/QUOTE]

What do you mean...he condemned sin...what do you mean by that? Did He say....SIN.....you are very bad, I condemn you????

so that the righteousness is fulfilled in us.

What do you mean? what happened to our sin???

No mention in the slightest of the brutalizing by the Father upon the Son so prominent in the PSA view.

The Lamb was slain.....to pay the penalty and redeem us.

Who brutalized our Lord? Who put Him upon the cross? Humankind, me!

So Jesus was just a victim? Not a sinless sacrifice?

Do not take my own shame as a contributor to His suffering for me. He suffered not by the hand of God,

So God did not give a multitude to the Son, for Him to redeem?
Isa.53 says it was indeed God;

 

[Iconoclast]

"agedman,

[QUOTE]The Victorious Christ preaches the cross, in all its shame upon those that perish and all the glory to those who believe.

What is not preached is that God so loved the world that He brutalized is only begotten son that some appeasement between obstinate rebellious humanity and His holiness may be credited to some who conjure up enough innate faith to get His attention.[/QUOTE]


What do you mean He preaches the cross? You are trying to make it void of any efficacy! Preach what....;look I was a victim?
God's law was not broken? There is no consequence. The unsaved are beaten with many stripes, were our sins just swept under the rug?

 

[Iconoclast]

It’s certainly is the issue, for you proclaimed a drifting was taking place into apostasy.

I am showing a far more perfect view of the atonement then that presented by PSA

You are drifting from the true meaning of the cross.

 

[Iconoclast]

Having studied this thread for some time in order to understand the outrageous positions taken by JonC and agedman, I can no longer remain silent.

I thank God for such stalwarts in the faith as iconoclast, Martin M and Aaron.

IMHO, I believe such statements as “Christ did not die to appease God. Christ died to appease the World” are not only God-dishonoring, but anti-Christian.

The world has never needed appeasing.

Appeasing what? Its thirst for blood? Its hatred of that which is good and holy?

It is our holy, righteous and just God who needs appeasing.

His divine and holy justice requires/demands satisfaction.

Christ alone satisfied, appeased, propitiated the vindicatory justice of God.

He did so through his active and passive obedience, from childhood through Calvary.

The OT animal sacrifices were shadows of Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross.

They were not sacrificed to appease the ‘World.’ They were continually sacrificed to temporarily appease the wrath of a holy God whose hatred of sin is so pronounced that He will not bestow forgiveness unless an appropriate punishment is rendered as payment for the sin.

Christ, the punished, was that payment. The bloody sacrifice of sinless man who is also infinite God was the only possible way to pay the infinite sin debt of God’s Elect.

Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors.

There is a sin debt owed God. It is not owed the world.

Our sin debt was paid in full by the blood of innocent Christ.

Luke 7 teaches the Parable of the Two Debtors. God is the creditor who can forgive debts, if He chooses. His forgiveness requires that Christ, our surety, pays in full our debt which, once satisfied, relieves us of payment.

But it is more complicated when the payment is made in blood, rather than currency. Blood signifies punishment by a torturous death.

It also signifies the unspeakable punishment due those who reject Christ as Lord and Savior.

To not believe the penal aspect of Christ’s bloody sacrifice is to elevate your wisdom above God’s.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.

I waited for awhile on the original thread also. I could not believe the denial of the Substitutionary atonement, The sinless Lamb bearing the wrath of God for our sins. The justice of God being established...not bypassed.

 

[agedman]

@Martin Marprelate, @Iconoclast, @Aaron, @JonC, @Servant of Lord Jesus, @Van, … et Al

If I left anyone out, my apologies.

It is so very unfortunate that so much miss information has clouded the issue of this thread.

I would very much like to continue with the most excellent discussions that have been had, and I really do think it educational.

I endorse Christ’s Victor as did Martin Luther and John Calvin. It is by far the most supported in the Scriptures.

I would like for each of you to consider the claims of this view, and here is a link from the Gospel Coalition that gives a very good background and supporting information.

Please do not assume I am advocating you to change your thinking. That is between you and the work of the Holy Spirit.

What I desire is that you have the most accurate information so that you may build your own decision not upon others teaching, but the understanding offered.

I need a few days off from the BB for my Lord has requested me on another project to His glory. But I may have time to drop in for a brief post. I do admire and appreciate you all and pray your days remain in His Spirit.

Almost for got the link: Christus Victor - The Gospel Coalition

There are perhaps more and better information on my view and if you find some post them, and as I have time I will most certainly read them all carefully.

Blessings

 

[Aaron]

Not completely the scriptural accounting, Aaron.

Christ is both high priest, the sacrificial lamb and the scapegoat. He is not just the just one but the justifier.

He is the propitiation and the alter of propitiation.

He is both the light and light giver, the water of life and life itself.

He is both priest and King, the sacrificed lamb and high priest.

These are not divisible into time compartments as some might desire that it fit some scheme of atonement.

All facets are represented in the type. You don't get to purge the one that falsifies your erroneous notions.

 

[Aaron]

But he really didn’t did he.

God provided the Lamb, and humankind did the sacrificing.

As Jon is wont to say, God uses men.

But, how in the type you employ is it that a quadrupedal beast is the Son of God, but the bipedal creature is just a creature?

 

[Aaron]

As Jon is wont to say, God uses men.

But, how in the type you employ is it that a quadrupedal beast is the Son of God, but the bipedal creature is just a creature?

It's late. Let me clarify: You're not being consistent with your allegory.