Penal Substitution

[JonC]

May I butt in to this thread.

There is this concept that God PUNISHED Himself.

That is just not supported in Scripture.

As I shared on a different thread, God was pleased that Christ suffered. However the suffering WAS NOT From God’s hand.

Rather, all that was doing the punishment was by the ungodly nature which occurs anytime God withholds support.

Through Scripture, in EVERY instance in which God’s wrath is displayed, it is by humans and nature occurring as a result of God withholding support.

This was the events of the cross.

There is only ONE place in all Scripture where God very directly by His own strength brings the wrath. That is at the second coming when the forces of this ungodly world are crushed by His sword.

God did not punish His Son, He was (according to Isaiah 53:10) pleased to allow what humans and nature do because it is what they by the ungodly authority do.

Now, I will bow out.

I agree. The problem with this discussion thus far as every participant on this thread advocating PSA has done so extra-biblically. This is why @Van is correct. Here we have theory built on theory until it is accepted as Scripture. If you ask for scripture you get opinion. The reason, I believe, is because so much of their theory will fall apart if they realize the idea of God being wrathful towards Christ rather than offering Him as a guilt offering is foreign to the Bible. The problem is that this means they also cannot comprehend what Scripture literally says about the Cross for reading into Scripture their theory. Blessings and hope become curses and anger; obedient humility becomes punishment; loving,self giving sacrifice becomes wrath. It is sad, but I truly believe somehow these men actually see those ideas written in the pages of God's Word. That's why I asked Y1 to highlight where the scripture he provided said what he claimed it stated clearly. He declined.

 

[agedman]

God Himself directed His wrath towards and upon Jesus, as it was God Himself who bore the full penalty in our stead!

Perhaps you can find a Scripture that actually states that God in rage punished His own self to the point of death.

I haven’t found it.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

May I butt in to this thread.

There is this concept that God PUNISHED Himself.

That is just not supported in Scripture.

As I shared on a different thread, God was pleased that Christ suffered. However the suffering WAS NOT From God’s hand.

Rather, all that was doing the punishment was by the ungodly nature which occurs anytime God withholds support.

Through Scripture, in EVERY instance in which God’s wrath is displayed, it is by humans and nature occurring as a result of God withholding support.

This was the events of the cross.

There is only ONE place in all Scripture where God very directly by His own strength brings the wrath. That is at the second coming when the forces of this ungodly world are crushed by His sword.

God did not punish His Son, He was (according to Isaiah 53:10) pleased to allow what humans and nature do because it is what they by the ungodly authority do.

Now, I will bow out.

Isaiah 53:10. 'Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief.'
Who bruised the Lord Jesus? Who put Him to grief? Who (v.6) laid on Him the iniquity of us all?
I know what Acts 4:27-28 says, but it cannot contradict what Isaiah 53 very clearly states, only explain how God did it.

 

[agedman]

There is room to accept forensic substitution IF one keeps in mind that just as in the OT the emphasis must be upon the blood shed.

Too often, the emphasis has been on the suffering, but that suffering was as God designed and was pleased.

There was no “wrath of God” upon the Son as some would desire to picture as being included as a suffered sacrifice necessary to make some payment due to either Satan or God. As if suffering can gain God’s favor of salvation.

The payment of SIN IS DEATH! No suffering will gain salvation.

As Christ “became sin for us” the result had to be death.

But the death did not bring redemption or even the forgiveness of sins.



Such responsibility was assigned to the blood. (Without the seeding of blood ....)


This is the testimony of the slain lamb of the OT. Certainly, the purity of the lamb and how the lamb (manner and ceremonial aspects) was slain was important. They were used to distinguish the sacrifice from all others slain.

The prophetic statements of the suffering savior show the importance, too. Again, as distinguishing from all others. This is part of Peter’s statement when pointing out it was “this same” Jesus.

But what brought redemption was not the ceremonial trappings, the purity of the lamb, not even the manner of death.

It was the blood.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I agree. The problem with this discussion thus far as every participant on this thread advocating PSA has done so extra-biblically. This is why @Van is correct. Here we have theory built on theory until it is accepted as Scripture. If you ask for scripture you get opinion

[edited] ! there are great vats of Scripture that I have cited over and over again and no one interacts with it but instead people have the gall to say that I am spouting opinion. Van did not engage with the OP in any way whatsoever, any more than you have.

JonC, go and count the number of Scriptural references in my OPs and then come back and tell me that I have argued extra-biblically. I don't mind being told that I have used the Scriptures incorrectly, but you have not done that but instead trotted out your own non-biblical nostra using a phrase which I have never used and which the Bible never mentions. [edited]

People hate PSA because they cannot bear the fact that God is utterly holy and mankind utterly sinful and salvation is all of God from start to finish and that man is so utterly sinful that God Himself must pay the penalty for His sin if he is going to be cleansed.

 

[agedman]

Isaiah 53:10. 'Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief.'
Who bruised the Lord Jesus? Who put Him to grief? Who (v.6) laid on Him the iniquity of us all?
I know what Acts 4:27-28 says, but it cannot contradict what Isaiah 53 very clearly states, only explain how God did it.

Exactly!!

Who did those things?

Did God reach down in rage and abuse His own Son as if He were some villain?

 

[JonC]

Isaiah 53:10. 'Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief.'
Who bruised the Lord Jesus? Who put Him to grief? Who (v.6) laid on Him the iniquity of us all?
I know what Acts 4:27-28 says, but it cannot contradict what Isaiah 53 very clearly states, only explain how God did it.

Perhaps we don't have to choose between Acts 4 and Isaiah 53. Perhaps God "put Him to grief" was "pleased to crush him" in the context that Christ's death at the hands of men was God's will. I say this because Acts 4 is not the only issue (there are passages in the Old Testament that state God will not abandon the righteous or one who loves Him and will not punish one without sin). One of the weaknesses of the arguments I've seen on this board is that some passages are chosen because they can be made to fit into a theory while others are deemed non applicable because they don't quite fit.

 

[agedman]

People hate PSA because they cannot bear the fact that God is utterly holy and mankind utterly sinful and salvation is all of God from start to finish and that man is so utterly sinful that God Himself must pay the penalty for His sin if he is going to be cleansed.

I disagree.

The question is not over PAYMENT, because that reduces the sinfulness to some determined amount able to be resolved by remuneration of merrit.

Such thinking is unscriptural!

What is the ONLY acceptable presentation to God?

The Blood.

Remove the blood or distract as some do from the blood, there is no salvation.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

There is room to accept forensic substitution IF one keeps in mind that just as in the OT the emphasis must be upon the blood shed.

'I am poured out like water,
And all My bones are out of joint;
My heart is like wax;
It has melted within Me.
My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
And My tongue lings to My jaws;
You have brought Me to the dust of death.

For dogs surround Me;
The congregation of the wicked has enclosed Me.
They pierced My hands and My feet;
I can count all My bones.
They look and stare at Me.
They divide My garments among them,
And for My clothing they cast lots' (Psalm 22:14-18).

Agedman, have you actually read my OPs? Could you not find it within you to comment on work that took me hours to do? Or do you just find it easier to spout your own opinions without one single verse of Scripture to back them up?

 

[JonC]

This is so wickedly false that I can hardly contain my anger! there are great vats of Scripture that I have cited over and over again and no one interacts with it but instead people have the gall to say that I am spouting opinion. Van did not engage with the OP in any way whatsoever, any more than you have.

JonC, go and count the number of Scriptural references in my OPs and then come back and tell me that I have argued extra-biblically. I don't mind being told that I have used the Scriptures incorrectly, but you have not done that but instead trotted out your own non-biblical nostra using a phrase which I have never used and which the Bible never mentions. You should be ashamed of yourself!

People hate PSA because they cannot bear the fact that God is utterly holy and mankind utterly sinful and salvation is all of God from start to finish and that man is so utterly sinful that God Himself must pay the penalty for His sin if he is going to be cleansed.

I do not mean to imply that your arguments have not been accompanied by Scripture. As I stated before, I believe you have provided one of the best summaries of PSA I have seen on this forum.

BUT insofar as addressing the issue I have been asking about - insofar as proving that God was wrathful, His anger directed at Christ as He punished His Son for crimes we have committed - the passages you have provided did not address the issue. You provide a passage and then add a commentary that is foreign to the passage you have provided. But I was specifically addressing @Yeshua1 's habit of providing Scripture and then saying something entirely different that the passage he had just quoted.

That said, my comment was not made with you in mind and you have my apology as I certainly appreciated the effort and care you took to explain PSA (so much so that I am saving....with your permission....your summary for a class on the theory).

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Exactly!!

Who did those things?

Did God reach down in rage and abuse His own Son as if He were some villain?

Answer the question. Look at Isaiah 53:10 and tell me who put the Lord Jesus to grief.
In answer to your question, God does not get into a rage. His anger against sin is constant and settled. The Lord Jesus Christ was made sin for us and yes, God did abuse Him exactly as if He were a villain. Crucifixion is what happened to villains in those days.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I disagree.

The question is not over PAYMENT, because that reduces the sinfulness to some determined amount able to be resolved by remuneration of merrit.

Such thinking is unscriptural!

What is the ONLY acceptable presentation to God?

The Blood.

Remove the blood or distract as some do from the blood, there is no salvation.

When you celebrate communion, do you only take the wine, or do you take the bread as well? "Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for You."

 

[agedman]

Because

'I am poured out like water,
And all My bones are out of joint;
My heart is like wax;
It has melted within Me.
My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
And My tongue lings to My jaws;
You have brought Me to the dust of death.

For dogs surround Me;
The congregation of the wicked has enclosed Me.
They pierced My hands and My feet;
I can count al My bones.
They look and stare at Me.
They divide My garments among them,
And for My clothing they cast lots' (Psalm 22:14-18).

Agedman, have you actually read my OPs? Could you not find it within you to comment on work that took me hours to do? Or do you just find it easier to spout your own opinions without one single verse of Scripture to back them up?

Martin, there is no desire to denigrate your thinking, but it is important to keep the focus.

Certainly Christ suffered. He did so because it PLEASED the Father, NOT because the Father poured “wrath” as some would account on His own Son.

Such thinking of God having displeasure toward the Son is not found in Scripture.

The suffering Savior prophecies were to be used as signifiers, signs, distinguishing Christ from all pretenders. Again the reason Peter pointed out the “who” in his message.

The suffering of the Saviour did not purchase salvation by suffering.

Surly God recognizes the efforts of men, even rewards efforts. But no effort - even suffering - touches the hem of salvation.

That PSA is modified away from the blood, it become as good as empty words.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

BUT insofar as addressing the issue I have been asking about - insofar as proving that God was wrathful, His anger directed at Christ as He punished His Son for crimes we have committed - the passages you have provided did not address the issue. I was specifically addressing @Yeshua1 's habit of providing Scripture and then saying something entirely different that the passage he had just quoted.

God's wrath is against sin; the Lord Jesus was made sin for us. God's wrath was against the Lord Jesus.
The Lord Jesus was our surety. A surety has to pay the debt of the one for whom he is surety- pay it down to the last penny. That is what the Lord Jesus did.
There is a cup, a cup of God's wrath, which sinners must drink down to the dregs. The Lord Jesus drank the cup of God's wrath.

All this was in my OP, along with all the Scriptural references, yet you have not engaged with any of it, but have the brass neck to say I have not addressed the issue. I don't think you ever read it. Shame on you!

I am through with this forum. It is a complete waste of time to write anything serious on it.

 

[JonC]

God's wrath is against sin; the Lord Jesus was made sin for us. God's wrath was against the Lord Jesus.
The Lord Jesus was our surety. A surety has to pay the debt of the one for whom he is surety- pay it down to the last penny. That is what the Lord Jesus did.
There is a cup, a cup of God's wrath, which sinners must drink down to the dregs. The Lord Jesus drank the cup of God's wrath.

All this was in my OP, along with all the Scriptural references, yet you have not engaged with any of it, but have the brass neck to say I have not addressed the issue. I don't think you ever read it. Shame on you!

I am through with this forum. It is a complete waste of time to write anything serious on it.

We already established God's wrath against sin means God's wrath is against the one who sinned. As you pointed out, this wrath is manifested in punishment or abuse and referring to sin itself as the object of wrath is "daft".

 

[agedman]

Answer the question. Look at Isaiah 53:10 and tell me who put the Lord Jesus to grief.
In answer to your question, God does not get into a rage. His anger against sin is constant and settled. The Lord Jesus Christ was made sin for us and yes, God did abuse Him exactly as if He were a villain. Crucifixion is what happened to villains in those days.

NO!!

There is not a single Scripture to sustain God abused His own Son, or that God acted viciously towards the one in whom He is “well pleased.”

God doesn’t even do that to erring children of His (believers).

Humans whipped, chastised, mocked... the Christ, not His Father

Humans pierced Him thrusting the cross into the ground with such force to move the bones out of joint but not breaking them.

Humans NOT the Father.

Humans and even nature performed exactly as God spoke it would happen because He purposed it. However, the Father didn’t have to be some monster, He allowed humankind and nature to deliver what was the ungodly estate of their own.

How then is the “wrath of God” seen on the cross?

It is found in the very words of the Savior!

“Father! Why have you forsaken me?”

Do you not know that in every instance (except one mentioned which is yet to happen) when the wrath of God is on display, it is result of God withholding Himself and allowing the ungodliness of nature and humans?

 

[agedman]

I am through with this forum. It is a complete waste of time to write anything serious on it.

What, you actually are not taking my response as serious?

I read your work.

I see weakness that needed modification

You think such analyses and comparison to Scripture principle is not taking you seriously?

Perhaps it is that when your thinking was placed into the actual account of the cross it showed up the hidden cracks and structural weakness.

Martin I consider your effort worthy, but your conclusion misguided by prior bias. Hence you feel your efforts have been trivialized.

Perhaps when you regather your strength, you will return to this important matter.

 

[JonC]

The seriousness and work you, @Martin Marprelate , have put into the OP is very evident. Along with Agedman I applaud your efforts. The OP does an excellent job at presenting PSA. That said, I also agree with Agedman that your conclusions are guided by prior bias. What you presuppose has contributed too much to your interpretation.

I regret that you have taken offence to my replies. I have tried to take care not to offend, but have obviously failed at the task. For that, I am sorry.

 

[agedman]

When you celebrate communion, do you only take the wine, or do you take the bread as well? "Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for You."

Certainly,

However, is not your position that God did the breaking?

The Lord was broken for me, is wonderful.

However, God cannot break Himself, but, as Christ stated, lay down His life.

Does Him laying down, as the Father willed, (for He did nothing that the Father did not instruct) result in the Father being filled with rage?

Such thinking of a wrath filled God is inconsistent with both the Scriptures and the revealed character of God.

However, for the cross to be accomplished, The Father had to withhold From the Son, forsake the Son, allow nature and human ungodliness to do all that was prophecied in damaging the Son.

Yes, certainly, Christ was broken. Just as the prophets and He foretold.

God didn’t do it to Himself, God laid down His arm of sustaining and strength and allowed humans and nature to expose their own ungodliness.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Six Hour Warning
This thread will be closed sometime after 1130 Pacific/1830 GMT.