Satan Murdered Jesus - The Scripture and Theology

[JonC]

The commentaries vary and it could refer to a variety of things. It could refer to Christ’s temptation, persecution of Himself and those that follow Him, His arrest, torture and death are possibilities. It could refer to the assault of demonic forces upon the church. It could refer to all of it.

The arguments have shifted in this thread from “Satan murdered Jesus” to people under the influence of Satan murdered Jesus to sinful people murdered Jesus and since sin entered into the world because of Satan then Satan murdered Jesus.

I do not believe Satan personally murdered Jesus. Scripture says “godless men” and also Jewish leaders. Both Romans and Jewish leaders killed Jesus.

I have acknowledged Satan’s influence of Judas in the betrayal. Jesus says the desire of the Jewish leaders to kill Him comes from them doing the will of Satan, their father, though I don’t believe they were Satan worshippers that received direct instructions from Satan to kill Him. Rather, this was an influence based in their sinful nature.

This whole debate, imo, is centered on views of the atonement, of which we disagree. The posts have gotten personal and are now not edifying to anyone, imo.

I have answered directly and have been civil.

peace to you

I appreciate the civility.

I am not sure that the difference is Penal Substitution Theory vs Christus Victor (although it does matter). I suggest instead that it depends on how far one takes Penal Substitution Theory (how far it influences other ideas).

Here is why:

John Gill interpreted the passage to mean that Satan caused Christ death (physical death) but in so doing brought about his own end.

John Piper interpreted the Serpent striking the heel as Satan causing Christ death, but Christ disarming Satan, having victory over him.

Timothy Keller interpreted this as Christ winning victory over Satan but in the process Satan causing Christ's death

John MacArthur calls the passage the protoevangelium (the first gospel), that Satan will cause Christ's death, but in so doing Christ will crush Satan's power. He presents this bruising of the heel as the crucifixion and Christ's death by the power of Satan, but the crushing of Satan a direct result of Christ's death (I disagree, as I'd place it at the resurrection).

John Gill, John Piper, John MacArthur and Tim Keller are all Calvinists who affirm Penal Substitution Theory.


So I agree that there are tie-ins, probably inseparable.

But since we all believe this was the predetermined plan of God, those four mentioned are not necessarily being inconsistent to say Satan murdered Christ.

 

[Van]

Okay, so if Satan was one of the sinners that killed Jesus, and Jesus was innocent, then you should have no problem affirming that Satan murdered Jesus.

I don’t know what you mean by “took his life.” If you mean that Jesus was unwilling, then of course I would not affirm that. If you mean simply that sinners killed him, then we both agree that sinners killed him.

Personal incredulity is a fallacious argument.
How can you say no one took Christ's life yet in the same breath say the sinners took His life. Twaddle

 

[Arthur King]

The commentaries vary and it could refer to a variety of things. It could refer to Christ’s temptation, persecution of Himself and those that follow Him, His arrest, torture and death are possibilities. It could refer to the assault of demonic forces upon the church. It could refer to all of it.

The arguments have shifted in this thread from “Satan murdered Jesus” to people under the influence of Satan murdered Jesus to sinful people murdered Jesus and since sin entered into the world because of Satan then Satan murdered Jesus.

I do not believe Satan personally murdered Jesus. Scripture says “godless men” and also Jewish leaders. Both Romans and Jewish leaders killed Jesus.

I have acknowledged Satan’s influence of Judas in the betrayal. Jesus says the desire of the Jewish leaders to kill Him comes from them doing the will of Satan, their father, though I don’t believe they were Satan worshippers that received direct instructions from Satan to kill Him. Rather, this was an influence based in their sinful nature.

This whole debate, imo, is centered on views of the atonement, of which we disagree. The posts have gotten personal and are now not edifying to anyone, imo.

I have answered directly and have been civil.

peace to you

I have consistently maintained that Satan murdered Jesus. In a similar way that Satan afflicted Job, killed his children, or afflicted many of the people directly mentioned in the New Testament, so also he killed Jesus.

This includes, though is not limited to, acting through sinful humans. Again, Jesus explicitly says that the devil is a murderer seeking to kill him, and refers to the crucifixion as the “coming of the ruler of this world.”

But I think you are right that this is tied to one’s view of the atonement, which is why PSA is so problematic - it leads us to expect a completely different event than the crucifixion. What PSA leads us to expect is that God threatens humanity with eternal hellfire that he is going to pour out on the earth, and then Jesus willingly goes to a public place in sight of all and suffers that eternal hellfire from heaven upon himself so no one else suffers it. But such an event is completely different than a torturous crucifixion at the hands of Romans, Jews, and the mob. This is why, on this thread, you have seen people say such things as “well, it wasn’t really the Romans or Jews or sinners or Satan that killed him at all,” in other words, completely denying the event of the cross that is before us.


If God did not want us to think that Jesus was being killed by sinners in an unjust crucifixion, he sure did choose a strange way of communicating that.

 

[Arthur King]

Personal incredulity is a fallacious argument.
How can you say no one took Christ's life yet in the same breath say the sinners took His life. Twaddle

I said it depends on what you mean by the phrase “take his life.”
If you mean “took his life” as in superseded his willingness or voluntariness, then no, no one took his life.
If you mean that sinners took his life in the sense that they killed him, then you and I agree that they took his life. Jesus did not commit suicide.

But you are trying to hide behind ambiguous and undefined phrases. You did the same with “Satan did not author Christ’s death.” Well, obviously what do you mean by “authored”? Whether we agree or disagree depends on the precise meaning of the word.

 

[JonC]

Pointless denial of the obvious. You want to admit not one took his life and still claim they did take His life.

Yes. I claim that Christ willingly lay down His life, that nobody took it from Him but He gave it willingly, like a sheep led to the slaughter, to be betrayed by Satan entering Judas, handed over by men doing the work of the Devil to be killed by godless men.

Unlike you, I do not view those passages as contradicting one another. So unlike you I am not in a position where I feel it necessary to deny God's Word.


Consider this - you claim to stand on one verse while denying others. What gives you the authority to make that determination?

 

[JonC]

To summarize what we know from Scripture:

1. Jesus lay down His own life, it wasn't taken (John 10:18)

2. Satan entered Judas to turn Christ over to the Jews (John 13:27)

3. The Jews that handed Jesus over to be killed were doing the will of their father the Devil, who was a murderer from the beginning (John 8:44-45)

4. Jesus was murdered by godless men (Acts 2:23)



I believe the logical conclusion is that Jesus lay down His own life, it wasn't taken from Him, to be betrayed by Satan entering Judas, handed over to be killed by Jewish leaders doing Satan's work, and to be murdered by godless men.


Some only believe John 10:18 and deny some or all of the other verses mentioned. I believe that is a mistake - those verses do not contradict one another.

 

[canadyjd]

To summarize what we know from Scripture:

1. Jesus lay down His own life, it wasn't taken (John 10:18)

2. Satan entered Judas to turn Christ over to the Jews (John 13:27)

3. The Jews that handed Jesus over to be killed were doing the will of their father the Devil, who was a murderer from the beginning (John 8:44-45)

4. Jesus was murdered by godless men (Acts 2:23)



I believe the logical conclusion is that Jesus lay down His own life, it wasn't taken from Him, to be betrayed by Satan entering Judas, handed over to be killed by Jewish leaders doing Satan's work, and to be murdered by godless men.


Some only believe John 10:18 and deny some or all of the other verses mentioned. I believe that is a mistake - those verses do not contradict one another.

@JonC, that is a very good summary of what scripture says. Well stated.

Peace to you

 

[JonC]

@JonC, that is a very good summary of what scripture says. Well stated.

Peace to you

I think it's good to lay it out like that. Too often people emphasize one verse while other people emphasize another. This risks talking past one another.


I think sometimes we dig in because we like to argue.

Being argumentative is one of the Baptist distinctives.

 

[kyredneck]

Just believe what Gid said, and what we were taught in SS. Satan’s strike to the heel is non fatal.

Yes. Non-fatal. Just as I posited in post #150:

“Non-fatal” in the sense that the grave could not contain Him, GOD RAISED HIM FROM THE DEAD.

 

[kyredneck]

ohn Gill interpreted the passage to mean that Satan caused Christ death (physical death) but in so doing brought about his own end.

John Piper interpreted the Serpent striking the heel as Satan causing Christ death, but Christ disarming Satan, having victory over him.

Timothy Keller interpreted this as Christ winning victory over Satan but in the process Satan causing Christ's death

John MacArthur calls the passage the protoevangelium (the first gospel), that Satan will cause Christ's death, but in so doing Christ will crush Satan's power. He presents this bruising of the heel as the crucifixion and Christ's death by the power of Satan, but the crushing of Satan a direct result of Christ's death (I disagree, as I'd place it at the resurrection).

John Gill, John Piper, John MacArthur and Tim Keller are all Calvinists who affirm Penal Substitution Theory.

Thank you. I asked on another thread:

"Give us some examples of theologians that agree with you - that Satan had nothing to do with the crucifixion of Christ." Penal Substitution Atonement Theory - Question

@Martin Marprelate: @canadyjd; @37818; @Van

it was <crickets>

 

[kyredneck]

Please give credence to @JonC’s warning not to develop theories and vain philosophies and then go to scripture to find support for them.

I've already answered that DIRECTLY to you.

<for some 'strange reason' I'm not able to link to the post that I wanted to>

But here's I what I want to repeat to you:

"I personally don't care about all the 'bloviation' that's transpired between the two camps of PST and CV on the BB. I have refrained from participating in that 'bloviation', but when I see blatant anti-scriptural positions stating that Satan had nothing to do with the crucifixion I can no longer refrain."

 

[kyredneck]

@Martin Marprelate: @canadyjd; @37818; @Van

Are there theologians that agree with you that Satan had nothing to do with the crucifixion?

Please, cite them.

I'd really like to know.

 

[Van]

I said it depends on what you mean by the phrase “take his life.”
If you mean “took his life” as in superseded his willingness or voluntariness, then no, no one took his life.
If you mean that sinners took his life in the sense that they killed him, then you and I agree that they took his life. Jesus did not commit suicide.

But you are trying to hide behind ambiguous and undefined phrases. You did the same with “Satan did not author Christ’s death.” Well, obviously what do you mean by “authored”? Whether we agree or disagree depends on the precise meaning of the word.

It is not what I mean by the phrase, it is what God means.
Murder means the taking of a life. You cannot have it both ways. Satan and wicked people were accomplices in Christ's crucifixion, but they did not take His life. They did not murder Him. They did not kill Him, He laid down His life. They did act upon His body such that a human would die as a result.

Your OP puts the emphasis on a mistaken view.

 

[Van]

SNIP

Unlike you, I do not view those passages as contradicting one another. So unlike you I am not in a position where I feel it necessary to deny God's Word.

Consider this - you claim to stand on one verse while denying others. What gives you the authority to make that determination?

I am sick of your claims of mind reading, you proclaiming I deny God's word.
What you charge me with actually describes you and your "against the person" argumentation.

Satan and wicked people were accomplices in Christ's crucifixion, but they did not take His life. They did not murder Him. They did not kill Him, He laid down His life. They did act upon His body such that a human would die as a result.​

 

[JonC]

It is not what I mean by the phrase, it is what God means.
Murder means the taking of a life. You cannot have it both ways. Satan and wicked people were accomplices in Christ's crucifixion, but they did not take His life. They did not murder Him. They did not kill Him, He laid down His life. They did act upon His body such that a human would die as a result.

Your OP puts the emphasis on a mistaken view.

The problem is that Scripture specifically states that Christ was murdered by godless men.

Your mistake, what led you to reject God's Word, is that you cannot understand both passages are true so you pick the one that you believes supports your theory.

In truth nobody took Christ life, He lay it down of His own will, to be murdered by godless men.


All of Scripture is true. That you cannot reconcile those passages in your mind is a problem with you, not with God.

 

[JonC]

I am sick of your claims of mind reading, you proclaiming I deny God's word.
What you charge me with actually describes you and your "against the person" argumentation.

Satan and wicked people were accomplices in Christ's crucifixion, but they did not take His life. They did not murder Him. They did not kill Him, He laid down His life. They did act upon His body such that a human would die as a result.​

It is not mind reading.

The Bible states that Christ lay down His life of His own accord, nobody took it from Him, He lay down His life to be murdered by godless men.

You deny that He was murdered by godless men.

It does not take a mind reader to understand that you accept some passages but deny others.

 

[Van]

@Martin Marprelate: @canadyjd; @37818; @Van

Are there theologians that agree with you that Satan had nothing to do with the crucifixion?

Please, cite them.

I'd really like to know.

Satan and wicked people were accomplices in Christ's crucifixion, but they did not take His life. They did not murder Him. They did not kill Him, He laid down His life. They did act upon His body such that a human would die as a result.

 

[Van]

It is not mind reading.

The Bible states that Christ lay down His life of His own accord, nobody took it from Him, He lay down His life to be murdered by godless men.

You deny that He was murdered by godless men.

It does not take a mind reader to understand that you accept some passages but deny others.

The bible does not state "He lay down His life to be murdered by godless men" That is your fictional interpretation, a false interpretation, it is utter nonsense to say no one, repeat no one, took His life, and then say someone took His life.

 

[JonC]

The bible does not state "He lay down His life to be murdered by godless men" That is your fictional interpretation, a false interpretation, it is utter nonsense to say no one, repeat no one, took His life, and then say someone took His life.

The Bible states that He lay down His life, that nobody took it, AND that He was murdered by godless men.

You deny that He was murdered by godless men. That is denying God's Word.


Christ lay down His life, nobody took it from Him, He went to the Cross willingly, as a lamb led to the slaughter, and was murdered by godless men.

All of Scripture matters. It is wrong to deny verses you do not like.

And those verses do not contradict one another. You believe they do, so you edit verses out of your Bible. But they don't.

 

[Arthur King]

It is not what I mean by the phrase, it is what God means.
Murder means the taking of a life. You cannot have it both ways. Satan and wicked people were accomplices in Christ's crucifixion, but they did not take His life. They did not murder Him. They did not kill Him, He laid down His life. They did act upon His body such that a human would die as a result.

Your OP puts the emphasis on a mistaken view.

Again, I don’t know what the phrase “taking a life” means. Can you please define it?

If you mean that they took Jesus’ life against his will, then I would not affirm that. But as I have demonstrated, a person can go willingly to their own murder.

If you simply mean they took his life in that they killed him, then we agree they took his life.

Bottom line is that If we agree that sinners unjustly killed an innocent Jesus, and one of those sinners was Satan, then for all my intents and purposes we agree that Satan murdered Jesus.

if “murder” means something different to you, then I don’t care. I am not ultimately arguing about words, but acts.