How does the Theory of Penal Substitution Atonement necessitate the Cross?

[Candidus]

I have no idea who Bob George is..

Have you been listening to The Buddha again recently??

So, here you go..

Are you sure? I wouldn't be shocked if he said that!

John 3:16..."for God so love the WORLD = That He Gave"..

Gave what?

His only begotten Son...

 

[Renniks]

Christ suffered the wages of sin. He shared in our infirmity.

Like I said, there are penal and substitutionary aspects of reconciliation.

Where PSA goes wrong is at its start. It assumes God holds to a worldly humanistic philosophy and applies that in a very flawed way to divine justice (it takes a flawed 16th century philosophy to heart).

Sure Christ experienced the suffering and death of a sinner (of a man). But it was not a punishment instead of us. It was for us but not so that we would not suffer that fate. He became man, became a curse, shared in our infirmity but was without sin.

Ok I've been trying to follow this and I think I finally found a question: if I understand it right, PSA says that God the Father poured out his anger on God the Son, so that justice was done for us all and he would not have to punish us. The problem I have struggled with is, I only see this alluded to in one place, in Isaiah where it says God was pleased to crush him. But that in itself is not PSA, it's at most only one aspect of PSA. What I see is Christ took upon himself the punishment in agreement with the Father, so it's not some kind of cosmic child abuse, but it's an agreement within the godhead, to gather all of humanity sins and place them on Christ. But even this is not a complete explanation of the atonement, because it's not only about our sins but about defeating death and Satan. I don't believe any of the theorys totally cover what scripture says about the cross and resurrection. Unless someone can show me differently.

 

[justbyfaith]

Interesting, you blew right past the facts with the superiority of blind dogma! The fact is, "punishment" in Isaiah is a bad translation. All of a sudden, after 2000 years, a "translation" appears to use the word "punishment." A sensible exegete of the Word would ask "why"/ And then they would ask, "Why is it all alone and no other passage in all of Scripture agrees with that?"

I knew that you couldn't find any passages that said that Jesus was punished as the passage I brought up does not say that. Your search is not over for the elusive "punishment."! The Scriptures never say that God punished Jesus on the Cross. That is a fact too. Isaiah does not say that either. The Inspired Word of God would have opted for word (A) if we were to understand punishment in the way of retributive justice. Technically, you cannot punish the innocent, for they are not guilty. An innocent man can be made to SUFFER the penalty due to the guilty, but they are not punished. Retribution would have missed the mark.

The Bible never states even one time that God punished Jesus on the cross! You will not find a single time in Scripture where any sacrifice offered to God was "punished." So we must ask, what did happen on the cross? The Bible unequivocally and without exception reveals that Jesus suffered on the cross. Mark 8:31, The Son of man must suffer. Luke 22:15; 24:46; 17:25, Before I suffer. Acts 3:18; 26:23, That Christ should suffer. Hebrews 13:12, his own blood, suffered without the gate. 1 Peter 1:11; 2:21; 2:23; 3:18; 4:1; 5:1, because Jesus also suffered for us....suffered in the flesh. 2nd Corinthians 1:5, the sufferings of Christ.

Look them up for yourself, then try and find a statement that God "punished" Jesus while He was on the Cross, "punishment" of Christ, that He was "punished" for our sins, or that the Son of man must be "punished." You will not find it because it is not true!
You can quibble about terminology, but the Scriptures evade punishment in reference to the death of Christ with consistency and passion! If you inflict a penalty on an innocent man, it is an injustice, and they are not punished; they only suffer.

Isaiah 53:4-5 cannot be saying that Jesus was merely chastened on our behalf; because if that were the case, we would not be chastened; for Jesus took our chastening for us in that case. Yet in Hebrews 12:5-11, it becomes clear that the Lord chastens His children; even those for whom He died on the Cross.

So then, your interpretation is out of luck unless you can come up with a rendering of the word other than chastening and/or punishment. Because other scripture makes it clear that the scripture in question isn't talking about chastening; and the only other option is that it is talking about the fact that Jesus took the punishment for our sins; unless you can think of another word that it might be rendered as.

 

[justbyfaith]

God thru Christ forgave the sin of the world. No! That would be Universalism.

Jesus died for the sins of the world; forgiveness is applied when a man places his faith in Christ and what He did for them in dying for them and in their place.

Are you a Christian? Yes.

If so, how did this happen to you? Talking to irrational lunatics.

So, the people who witnessed to you, you identify as irrational lunatics?

How is it that in accepting what they said to you, you do not count yourself also to be an irrational lunatic?

Nonsense!


More Nonsense; listening to Bob George recently?

See 1 Corinthians 1:18, 1 Corinthians 1:21.

It becomes more and more clear that the people who are contending here for a denial of PSA as a doctrine are unregenerated individuals.

 

[Candidus]

What I see is Christ took upon himself the punishment in agreement with the Father, so it's not some kind of cosmic child abuse, but it's an agreement within the godhead, to gather all of humanity sins and place them on Christ.

It's just cosmic child abuse by a Father that has a child who is a sadist. Inescapable.

What is wrong for man is somehow right for God? It is an injustice to punish the innocent.

No matter the "agreement in the Godhead, God is One. The Trinity is One, and it is impossible for one Person of that Trinity to be the Punisher, and the other the Punished. If Jesus was Punished, he was guilty; if Jesus was guilty, He could not exist as part of the Trinity in that moment. If God can exist and not be a Trinity, not be the same, yesterday, today and forever, then Jesus was never essential to the Godhead.

 

[Candidus]

It becomes more and more clear that the people who are contending here for a denial of PSA as a doctrine are unregenerated individuals.

No, it just proves that those that append Penal Substitution to the Gospel are not Christian, but part of a works cult that does not believe the Gospel of the Bible.

 

[Candidus]

Isaiah 53:4-5 cannot be saying that Jesus was merely chastened on our behalf; because if that were the case, we would not be chastened; for Jesus took our chastening for us in that case. Yet in Hebrews 12:5-11, it becomes clear that the Lord chastens His children; even those for whom He died on the Cross.

So then, your interpretation is out of luck unless you can come up with a rendering of the word other than chastening and/or punishment. Because other scripture makes it clear that the scripture in question isn't talking about chastening; and the only other option is that it is talking about the fact that Jesus took the punishment for our sins; unless you can think of another word that it might be rendered as.

Jesus was not chastened or punished by God. Read the verse again... this time with your eyes open!

 

[justbyfaith]

If Jesus was Punished, he was guilty;

He was punished and He was not guilty; for He took our sins upon Himself and then the wrath of the Father fell upon Him for our iniquity; while His perfect innocence is now applied to us when His shed blood is applied to us, so that we obtain all of the favour of the perfect Son of God.

And this is the gospel by which we are saved.

Departure from it if you ever believed in it might even constitute leaving salvation. That would make you a Luke 8:13 Christian before you fell away.

 

[justbyfaith]

Jesus was not chastened or punished by God. Read the verse again... this time with your eyes open!

My eyes are wide open in reading the verses...and they tell me that Jesus died for me...that the chastisement for my peace was upon Him and that He bore my grief and carried my sorrow...He took the punishment for my sins.

What you deniers are not getting is that God does not have to use precise language to get His point across...for He also has sent His Holy Spirit...and the Holy Spirit testifies to us of what He did for us.

Therefore I would suggest that you ask the Holy Spirit whether PSA is sound doctrine or not...because it is clear to me that it is the gospel by which we are saved. That God might be just and the justifier of him who believeth in Jesus.

 

[Candidus]

My eyes are wide open in reading the verses...and they tell me that Jesus died for me...that the chastisement for my peace was upon Him and that He bore my grief and carried my sorrow...He took the punishment for my sins.

What you deniers are not getting is that God does not have to use precise language to get His point across...for He also has sent His Holy Spirit...and the Holy Spirit testifies to us of what He did for us.

Therefore I would suggest that you ask the Holy Spirit whether PSA is sound doctrine or not...because it is clear to me that it is the gospel by which we are saved. That God might be just and the justifier of him who believeth in Jesus.

The Holy Spirit didn't tell you that the Father punished the Son on the cross; that is only in your imagination and not the Bible.

 

[Candidus]

He was punished and He was not guilty; for He took our sins upon Himself and then the wrath of the Father fell upon Him for our iniquity; while His perfect innocence is now applied to us when His shed blood is applied to us, so that we obtain all of the favour of the perfect Son of God.

And this is the gospel by which we are saved.

Departure from it if you ever believed in it might even constitute leaving salvation. That would make you a Luke 8:13 Christian before you fell away.

You cannot punish the innocent, they can only suffer. If you demand that Jesus was punished, then you are saying that He was guilty. Christ's active obedience is nowhere stated in Scripture as being transferred to anyone. The Bible never says the wrath of God fell on Jesus while He was on the cross.

It can't be in the Gospel if it is not in the Bible! Can it!

Departing from the faith has to be grounded in facts that God has said; you cannot fall away from theological fictions that don't exist!

 

[justbyfaith]

The Holy Spirit didn't tell you that the Father punished the Son on the cross; that is only in your imagination and not the Bible.

As a matter of fact He has taught me this. It is even an integral part of what God has done on behalf of sinners who would not be able to bear the punishment that is justly due unto them...and to reject this truth is to reject salvation itself.

If you demand that Jesus was punished, then you are saying that He was guilty.

No, I am not saying He was guilty; I am saying that the innocent Lamb of God suffered and died in the place of sinful humanity. He was punished instead of us; because we were guilty.

Christ's active obedience is nowhere stated in Scripture as being transferred to anyone.

It can't be in the Gospel if it is not in the Bible! Can it!

You simply don't understand what the word propitiation means.

 

[Stumpmaster]

Unfortunately, quoting John 10:17-18 to an unbeliever would tell them nothing of Atonement, or the need for Atonement.

It's a good verse to give those who think Christ was powerless against His oppressors. Theoretical inputs with terms like Penal Substitutionary Atonement go right over the heads of many, both saved and unsaved, I have observed.

 

[Behold]

If so, how did this happen to you? Talking to irrational lunatics.

its not necessary that you answer a question asking you to share your conversion experience, but, when you wont do it, your forum cred disappears.

 

[amadeus]

its not necessary that you answer a question asking you to share your conversion experience, but, when you wont do it, your forum cred disappears.

And does forum credit matter to God?

 

[justbyfaith]

And does forum credit matter to God?

For the one who is sharing the truth of God's word, I believe that it is important to God that the same have credibility in the eyes of the ones he is ministering to.

 

[Renniks]

It's just cosmic child abuse by a Father that has a child who is a sadist. Inescapable.

What is wrong for man is somehow right for God? It is an injustice to punish the innocent.

No matter the "agreement in the Godhead, God is One. The Trinity is One, and it is impossible for one Person of that Trinity to be the Punisher, and the other the Punished. If Jesus was Punished, he was guilty; if Jesus was guilty, He could not exist as part of the Trinity in that moment. If God can exist and not be a Trinity, not be the same, yesterday, today and forever, then Jesus was never essential to the Godhead.

Wouldn't it really be the Father, Son and Spirit all suffering for our sin, even if Jesus is the one holding them? The reason I say that he took our sins on him is Isaiah 53:
Surely he took up our pain
and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God,
stricken by him, and afflicted.
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
Or KJV:
But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Again, I don't see this as PSA per say, but it certainly seems to indicate that our sins were put on Christ at the cross.

And no I don't understand the mystery of how this can happen to only one part of the God head.

 

[justbyfaith]

Again, I don't see this as PSA per say,

I do.

 

[amadeus]

For the one who is sharing the truth of God's word, I believe that it is important to God that the same have credibility in the eyes of the ones he is ministering to.

"Therefore thou shalt speak all these words unto them; but they will not hearken to thee: thou shalt also call unto them; but they will not answer thee." Jerem. 7:27

 

[mjrhealth]

For the one who is sharing the truth of God's word, I believe that it is important to God that the same have credibility in the eyes of the ones he is ministering to.

That doest work on forums only face to face.