Penal Substitution Theory and the presupposed (eisegesis) definition of מוּסָר in Isaiah 53:5

[Jane_Doe22]

Because it was through suffering that He "learned obedience" and was "made perfect" so that He would be a High Priest. His suffering relates to his humanity as He became the "second Adam" or the "Firstborn". I believe He had to suffer and die under the curse, experience the wages of sin (be completely "Adam" yet without sin) in order to be able to represent mankind.

So it is for understanding alone? Not related to directly with justice or sin or sacrifice for sins or removing of sins?

 

[John Caldwell]

I said the same thing.

I'm trying to think of an explanation (the difference is in the words "instead of" and "for".

 

[John Caldwell]

So it is for understanding alone? Not related to directly with justice or sin or sacrifice for sins?

Not for understanding alone but to introduce the Kingdom of God and the act of recreation.

But yes, I'd say our redemption is the righteousness of God manifested apart from the law (not related directly with justice or sin or sacrifice for sins, although these point to this greater salvation).

 

[CharismaticLady]

I do stand in a very difficult position to understand (especially from our culture and mindset).

I once held, believed, taught, and preached Penal Substitution Theory and in many ways it is the cornerstone of evangelical Protestant religion today. We come by it naturally.

When I became convicted that the Theory was not biblical I had to read Scripture apart from the theory (which was very hard). I may not be the best at articulating my position but if you are familiar with C.S. Lewis and his works then you have encountered what has been called the "classic" view. You can also see it in early church writings.

The difficult part for me was that it does not always ask the questions I was accustomed to being answered by Penal Substitution Theory because those questions do not make sense outside of the Theory.

For example, David asked “if Christ were not required to be punished for our sin what would happen to our guilt”. Outside of Penal Substitution Theory the question itself is asinine. We are guilty. Nothing changes our guilt. We are, however, forgiven. Nothing happens to our guilt.

Beyond that, how would Christ being punished for our sins prevent us from being punished? In the Bible sin and punishment does not work that way.

If David kills Steve and I’m arrested and executed, but DNA tests later prove it was David then David is not off the hook. This warped sense of retributive justice applied to Scripture in Penal Substitution Theory just does not work. Aquinas was absolutely correct that one person cannot be justly punished for the sins of another.

What you are saying seems to be the opposite for what WILL happen. Are you saying we still have to pay for the sins Jesus took away, and go to hell?

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Not for understanding alone but to introduce the Kingdom of God and the act of recreation.

But yes, I'd say our redemption is the righteousness of God manifested apart from the law (not related directly with justice or sin or sacrifice for sins, although these point to this greater salvation).

So.. how does this suffering-and-death-for-understanding become an atonement and cleansing of mankind's sins?

 

[CharismaticLady]

I'm trying to think of an explanation (the difference is in the words "instead of" and "for".

Instead of and for are explanations of the same thing. We committed sin - it is those sins for which we must die. But Jesus died instead.

 

[reformed1689]

It is not Jesus suffering a penalty for my sins BUT Jesus suffering a penalty instead of me suffering the penalty.

Ok, why are you making that distinction. If he isn't suffering a penalty for my sin, what penalty is he suffering?

 

[John Caldwell]

I said the same thing.

Let's try this:

The wages of sin is death and death has spread to all mankind. Jesus became a curse for us and took upon Himself these wages. But we are not spared a physical death. We will die physically. Christ saves us through death.

So dying a physical death was for our sins, but it was not instead of us dying a physical death.

 

[John Caldwell]

Ok, why are you making that distinction. If he isn't suffering a penalty for my sin, what penalty is he suffering?

You studied the same history I studied (you know that this was an important distinction in Aquinas' theology). It was essential to the early church (granted, they were going through persecutions). It is important here as well.

Use the example I offered of a physical death -

Jesus died a physical death for our sins. Did Jesus die a physical death instead of us dying a physical death? No, of course not. Does that mean Jesus did not die physically for us? No. But He did not die physically instead of us dying.

 

[CharismaticLady]

So dying a physical death was for our sins, but it was not instead of us dying a physical death.

What other kind of death is there?

 

[John Caldwell]

@David Taylor ,

Did Jesus die a physical death? YES.

Did Jesus die a physical death for our sins? YES.

Did Jesus die a physical death instead of us dying a physical death? NO


I do not know another way to explain the difference between “for” (which is in Scripture) and “instead” (which is not). These little "tweeks" Penal Substitution Theory makes changes the entire meaning.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Jesus died a physical death for our sins. Did Jesus die a physical death instead of us dying a physical death? No, of course not. Does that mean Jesus did not die physically for us? No. But He did not die physically instead of us dying.

Yes, Jesus did. Ultimately, hell is death.

 

[John Caldwell]

What other kind of death is there?

There is the "second death" but that is at Judgment.

I specify because Penal Substitution Theory focuses on Jesus experiencing a spiritual death rather than a physical death. That is why @Steve Owen insists Jesus experienced three hours of what the lost will experience in Hell (which he attributes to spiritual death).

In the Bible the focus is physical death (the "second death" is Christ-centered judgment and not a part of the "sin problem" remedied at the cross by definition, but rather the product of the Cross as all judgment is given the Son).

 

[CharismaticLady]

Did Jesus die a physical death instead of us dying a physical death? NO

Again, death might not be immediate like in the Old Testament where people were stoned to DEATH, but eventually in hell. It is called the second death.

 

[John Caldwell]

Yes, Jesus did. Ultimately, hell is death.

I'd disagree because although Jesus died He was in Paradise with the thief.

 

[CharismaticLady]

There is the "second death" but that is at Judgment.

I specify because Penal Substitution Theory focuses on Jesus experiencing a spiritual death rather than a physical death. That is why @Steve Owen insists Jesus experienced three hours of what the lost will experience in Hell (which he attributes to spiritual death).

In the Bible the focus is physical death (the "second death" is Christ-centered judgment and not a part of the "sin problem" remedied at the cross by definition, but rather the product of the Cross as all judgment is given the Son).

LOL, I just said the same thing. The second death IS death. It is eternal death. Jesus died that death, but was resurrected to a new life, just like us.

 

[CharismaticLady]

I'd disagree because although Jesus died He was in Paradise with the thief.

So? For three days His Spirit was in Paradise. But his body was dead.

 

[CharismaticLady]

specify because Penal Substitution Theory focuses on Jesus experiencing a spiritual death rather than a physical death. That is why @Steve Owen insists Jesus experienced three hours of what the lost will experience in Hell (which he attributes to spiritual death).

I agree that the damned experience BOTH a physical and spiritual death. The saved will only experience a physical death, but receive a glorified body, as Jesus did after the ascension, in my opinion. He had to prove to His disciples that it was Him raised from the dead by His wounds. But that was temporary.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

So.. how does this suffering-and-death-for-understanding become an atonement and cleansing of mankind's sins?

*bump* for @John Caldwell
Trying to understand, no bashing.

 

[CharismaticLady]

*bump* for @John Caldwell
Trying to understand, no bashing.

What does "bump" infer? Is that a fist bump?