1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured Penal Substitution is NOT a “Theory”

Discussion in 'Christian Theology Forum' started by Enoch111, Nov 27, 2019.

  1. Enoch111

    Enoch111 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,390
    Likes Received:
    5,284
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Canada
    PART I
    Christians will find many articles or writings which allege that Penal Substitution as applied to the finished work of Christ is a “theory”, and one among many. They will also allege that this is purely a Reformed doctrine, and that the Reformers came up with this teaching, rather than it being a Bible and Gospel truth, which all Bible-believing Christians accept (including Non-Calvinists). But Penal Substitution is not a theory. It is Gospel Truth. And we do not need to look at the writings of the Early Church Fathers (or any so-called scholars or theologians) to see if they had a correct understanding of Bible truth. Sometimes they did, and sometimes they did not. And they certainly did not write by Divine inspiration.

    WHAT DOES PENAL SUBSTITUTION MEAN?
    Theopedia provides us with a satisfactory summary of the meaning of penal substitution. “Penal substitutionary atonement refers to the doctrine that Christ died on the cross as a substitute for sinners. God imputed the guilt of our sins to Christ, and he, in our place, bore the punishment that we deserve. This was a full payment for sins, which satisfied both the wrath and the righteousness of God, so that He could forgive sinners without compromising His own holy standard.”

    The word “penal” is related to penalty, particularly crimes committed by criminals. But it is also applicable to sins committed by sinners. There is a penalty for every crime or infraction of the laws of the land.
    And there is also a divine penalty for every sin committed. We see divine penalties applied in the Flood of Noah’s day as well as the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (among other cities and nations in the Bible).

    The word “substitution” simply means that someone other than the criminal or the sinner has been punished for the crime or sin committed. It would be similar to having two brothers in a court of law where one of them has been convicted of being a murderer. The other brother would approach the judge and ask that the death penalty be applied to him, so that his guilty brother can go free. The penalty would not change, but the one who paid the penalty would have been substituted. And the demands of justice would have been met.

    GOD IS THE ULTIMATE RIGHTEOUS JUDGE
    God has many attributes and many offices. One of them is that God is the Divine Judge of all humanity. There are numerous Scriptures which proclaim that God is the Divine Judge, and that all His judgments are righteous.

    And the heavens shall declare His righteousness: for God is Judge Himself. Selah. (Ps 50:6) But God is the Judge: He putteth down one, and setteth up another. (Ps 75:7) Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the Righteous Judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love His appearing. (2 Tim 4:8) Here Christ is the Judge, and indeed God the Father has handed over all judgment to Christ: Because He hath appointed a day, in the which He will judge the world in righteousness by that Man whom He hath ordained; whereof He hath given assurance unto all men, in that He hath raised Him from the dead. (Acts 17:31)

    THE PENALTY FOR SINS AND WICKEDNESS IS DIVINE WRATH
    Throughout Scripture we see that Christ was indeed the perfect and only substitute for all mankind. “Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor 15:3). Had there been no cross, every sinner (all humanity) would be judged as guilty of death. And that would include the first (or physical) death as well as the second (or spiritual and eternal) death, which is separation from God in the Lake of Fire, and which expresses the wrath of God against sin.

    For those who do not understand (or believe) that it is wrath, we have these Scriptures: He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. (John 3:36) For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness...Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them...But unto them that are contentious,and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile. (Rom 1:18,32; 2:8,9) And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: (Rev 14:9,10)

    THE LAMB OF GOD TOOK UPON HIMSELF THE WRATH OF GOD
    When Christians reflect upon the sufferings of Christ on the cross, they often focus on the physical pain and excruciating agony of that cross (the worst form of Roman punishment). But God would have us focus on the anguish within the soul of Christ while He bore the wrath of God within Himself. While the word “wrath” does not appear in the Gospel accounts of the crucifixion of Christ, we must be clear that that is what was applied to Christ. But it is indicated indirectly in both the Old and New Testaments. And we have other Scriptures which present the agony within the soul and spirit of Christ while He hung on that cross. The Messianic Psalms may have a double application.
     
    brakelite, marks and Helen like this.
  2. Enoch111

    Enoch111 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,390
    Likes Received:
    5,284
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Canada
    PART II

    TOTAL DARKNESS PREVENTED MEN FROM SEEING THE AGONY OF CHRIST
    Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour...And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour. And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst.(Mt 27:45; Lk 23:44,45) As many were astonied [astonished] at thee; His visage was so marred more than any man, and His form more than the sons of men: (Isa 52:14)


    THE FATHER TEMPORARILY FORSOOK THE SON IN HIS WRATH
    And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? (Mt 27:46) My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring? (Ps 22:1)

    CHRIST’S HEART “MELTED LIKE WAX” IN INTENSE AGONY

    I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels.[internal parts or organs] (Ps 22:14) Reproach hath broken my heart; and I am full of heaviness: and I looked for some to take pity, but there was none; and for comforters, but I found none. (Ps 69:20)

    THE “TERRORS OF DEATH” FELL UPON CHRIST, HORROR OVERWHELMED HIM

    My heart is sore pained within me: and the terrors of death are fallen upon me. Fearfulness and trembling are come upon me, and horror hath overwhelmed me. (Ps 55:4,5) I sink in deep mire, where there is no standing: I am come into deep waters, where the floods overflow me. (Ps 69:2) Let not the waterflood overflow me, neither let the deep swallow me up, and let not the pit shut her mouth upon me. (Ps 69:15) The sorrows of death compassed me, and the pains of hell gat hold upon me: I found trouble and sorrow. (Ps 116:3)

    CHRIST’S SOUL WAS PIERCED WITH “A SWORD” (THE WRATH OF GOD)
    Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling [my precious life] from the power of the dog.[figurative for Gentile enemies] (Ps 22:20) For I have eaten ashes like bread, and mingled my drink with weeping, Because of thine indignation and thy wrath: for thou hast lifted me up, and cast me down. (Ps 102:9,10) Awake, O sword, against my Shepherd, and against the Man that is my fellow, saith the LORD of hosts: smite the Shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones. (Zech 13:7)

    CHRIST WAS SMITTEN BY GOD AND AFFLICTED
    For they persecute Him whom thou hast smitten; and they talk to the grief of those whom thou hast wounded. (Ps 69:26) Surely He hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem Him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. (Isa 53:4)

    CHRIST BORE THE PUNISHMENT FOR OUR PEACE

    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.(Isa 53:5)

    CHRIST PAID THE PENALTY FOR OUR SINS AND OUR GUILT
    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. (Isa 53:6) He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare His generation? for He was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was He stricken. (Isa 53:8)

    CHRIST MADE HIS SOUL AN OFFERING FOR SIN
    Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. (Isa 53:10-12)
     
  3. Helen

    Helen Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    13,114
    Likes Received:
    16,159
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Canada
    Thank you...good posts!
     
    brakelite and Enoch111 like this.
  4. John Caldwell

    John Caldwell Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    574
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Penal Substitution Theory is one of several theories of atonement (others include Moral Influence Theory , Ransom Theory, Ontological Substitution Theory, Recapitulation Theory, and so forth).

    What makes it a theory is not Scripture but the theory which hold penal and substitution aspects of the Atonement together into a theoretical narrative.

    Scripture says that the chastisement for our wellbeing fell in Christ, by His stripes we are healed, and in Him we escape the wrath to come. Scripture tells us God chastises His children (who are not children of wrath). We see substitution (or, more percisely, we see at least representation) and we see a penal aspect (or at least a consequence).

    Penal Substitution Theory puts these statements into a narrative (like how Origen put passages about Ransom into a narrative of God paying a random to Satan).

    Penal Substitution Theory is more than the Scriptures it uses because the Theory also claims that God punished Christ instead of punishing us (this is human extra-biblical reasoning). The Theory presupposes divine justice is as such that it had to be satisfied in order for forgiveness to take placed by the punishment of sin (a 16th humanistic approach to retributive justice.... Read Les Miserables for a good illustration).

    There are other issues with Penal Substitution Theory. While it is a relatively new theory it is one that is most popular with evangelical Protestant churches.

    I have never heard it was primarily a Reformed doctrine (if Reformed means Calvinism), but it is a Protestant doctrine.
     
    Mungo likes this.
  5. John Caldwell

    John Caldwell Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    574
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States

    Here are a few things that make the above definition a theory.


    1. Scripture states that Christ died for our sins and that by His work (by His stripes) we are healed. BUT Scripture itself does not teach that Christ’s death was as a substitute for sinners (Scripture uses the explanation of representation, which is not exactly the same).

    2. Scripture states that Christ died for us and for our sins, but not “in our place”. This is theoretical.

    3. The idea of a “full payment for sins” is philosophical. It is based on the 16th century judicial system that a crime (not necessarily the criminal) must be recompensed proportionately. This is not what Scripture teaches in terms of divine justice (Scripture teaches that God forgives upon repentance, not that a full payment must be received in order to satisfy wrath and the righteousness of God.

    4. The idea that God could not forgive men except that his wrath and righteousness (or justice) be satisfied is theory. Scripture states only one requirement for forgiveness and that is true repentance.

    5. It is theoretical that retributive justice (not retribution but the humanistic philosophy of justice) is God’s holy standard.

    This idea of “the demands of justice” is a contextualization John Calvin (a lawyer) used in his atonement narrative. This is theory – not Scripture. Scripture conditions God’s forgiveness upon true repentance and therefore divine justice (God’s standard of righteousness) would follow the same idea of justice.


    Scripture teaches that the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life. Sin entered the world through Adam and death through sin. It is appointed to men once to die and then the judgment.

    Scripture does not teach that the consequences of sin is spiritual death (that spiritual death spread to all men because all have sinned). Scripture states that all will die (physically) and then the judgment.

    The theory here is an amalgamation of the curse in Genesis and under the law with the judgment that was given to Christ as the Father judges no one but has given all judgment to the Son.


    I think we all agree with Part II.



    My point is not whether the Theory is right or wrong. My point is that it is a theory and when we fail to recognize the human reasoning and philosophies in the theory (when we start seeing it as if it were Scripture) then we stop recognizing the difference between our understandings and God's Word.
     
    Mungo likes this.
  6. Enoch111

    Enoch111 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,390
    Likes Received:
    5,284
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Canada
    That's precisely why I have posted Scriptures to confirm and establish that regardless of anything anyone has postulated, Penal Substitution is SOLID Gospel Truth.

    This is similar to the biblical account of creation versus the theory of evolution. One is based upon divine revelation, the other is based upon pure speculation.
     
    Helen likes this.
  7. Enoch111

    Enoch111 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,390
    Likes Received:
    5,284
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Canada
    You have made a number of false and/or misleading statements here, which I need to point out.

    All you had to do is consult Brown-Driver-Briggs to see that *chastisement* has several applications therefore context is critical. Yes God chastises His children, but what do we read in Isaiah 53:5?
    The chastisement of (or for) our peace was upon Him". That is a continuation of the truth that "He was wounded for our transgressions". Therefore it is a clear statement of Penal Substitution.

    So it does not help anyone to mislead them by talking about the chastisement of children. Furthermore "with His stripes we are healed" is a totally different aspect of the finished work of Christ which is applicable to us. It has no bearing on what was applied to Christ by God the Father.
    Now you are making a statement bordering on heresy. Do you or do you not believe that Christ died for YOUR sins according th the Scriptures? Evidently you do not, since you call it "human extra-biblical reasoning". Do you see what happens when people start rejecting Gospel Truth?
    Since Penal Substitution is embedded in Scripture going all the way back to Genesis, how can it be "a relatively new theory"? It does not help anyone when you make absurd statements.
    Reformed is interchangeable with Protestant, so that is neither here nor there.
     
  8. Enoch111

    Enoch111 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    7,390
    Likes Received:
    5,284
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Canada
    We have more false or misleading statements in this post.
    You are blatantly denying what Scripture affirms, as clearly shown in the OP. So you have dismissed Bible truth and substituted your own reasoning. Which means that you do not really believe that Christ died for YOUR sins according to the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3)

    This is another absurd statement. If Christ died for our sins, He died in our place. Even a child would see that. So you keep digging yourself deeper and deeper into a hole of heresy.
    For a Christian to make such a heretical statement is shocking. Do you really believe that you will personally pay partially for your sins down the road, since Christ only paid partially? Anyone who will pay for his sins will be in the Lake of Fire. Do you see how you are undermining the Gospel? So you need to ask yourself at which point in your life did you commit yourself to opposing the Gospel.
    This is another heretical statement. The Gospel is crystal clear that God could not possibly forgive sins and maintain His righteousness and justice until and unless His wrath against sin was satisfied by the offering up of Christ. That is already shown in the OP, and you have ignored everything presented.
    So what you are saying is that there are no demands of Divine Justice, and if there are any, then the sinner will meet those demands, not Christ.

    So in a few words you have REJECTED THE GOSPEL and the Finished Work of Christ. Which means that you have become a heretic. For your own sake, you would be better off to say nothing more.
     
  9. John Caldwell

    John Caldwell Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    574
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    I did not mean to deny even one verse of Scripture. If I did, I assure you it was unintentional and it is something that I need to address in my own theology.

    The charge that I (and all who hold different theories of Atonement) have in fact rejected the gospel and the work of Christ is serious and I think that it demands I once again reevaluate my own views as if the charge is correct it is of eternal significance.

    So as not to be a stumbling block to my own edification let’s hit the “pause button” and deal with the issue one verse at a time as I certainly want to hold a more biblical view.

    Please provide a verse (without commentary/ comments) so that I can know (one at a time) the passage I denied. I ask this because comments/ commentary will just muddle the waters (I do not mind disagreeing with people's commentary/ interpretation) and I think it is important to take it slow and make sure I can move to a point in my own view where I hold rather than reject any of the verse(s) you discovered I rejected.

    Thank you, both for pointing out the issue to me and in advance for bearing with me as I work through these verses I apparently denied. Once you have pulled me back to solid ground we can discuss our differing interpretations/ theologies.

    Thanks,

    John
     
  10. John Caldwell

    John Caldwell Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    574
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    For anyone who may read this thread and wonder:

    I am not aware of any passages that I have rejected, although I do reject the Penal Substitution Theory. I am thankful @Enoch111 is willing to back up his post by providing passages I consider alongside the ones I already affirm rather than making blind and unsupported claims. It is always good to reexamine our believes against Scripture. We do need to make sure it is Scripture and not another person's opinion/ interpretation that we are taking to heart.


    This is what I do believe:

    I believe that Christ redeemed us from the curse of the lay by becoming a curse for us; that it is for our sake the Father made Him to be sin who knew no sin so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God; that Jesus Christ is the propitiation for our sins, and for the sins of the whole world; that Christ suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that He might bring us to God being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit; that we all have gone astray and the Lord has laid on Christ the iniquity of us all; that we were once dead in our trespasses and God made us alive together with Christ having forgiven us all our trespasses by canceling the record of debt that stood against us; that Christ had to be made like us in all respects so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest to make propitiation for our sins; that God put Christ forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith; that Christ came to give his life as a ransom for many; that it was the will of the Father to crush Him, to put Him to grief; that Christ is the founder and perfecter of our faith; that Christ bore our sorrows and grief yet we ourselves esteemed Him as stricken and smitten of God and afflicted while instead He was pierced for our transgressions and crushed for our iniquities and the chastening for our well-being fell upon Christ; it is by Christ’s stripes that we are healed and in Him we escape the wrath that is to come; in Christ there is no judgment; the world has been judged already; the Father judges no one but has given all judgment to the Son; God hears and does not despise those who are His; it is equally an abomination to God to acquit the guilty and to condemn the righteous.

    Some of the Passages that I affirm which support my belief: Isaiah 53; Galatians 3; 2 Corinthians 5; 1 Peter 3; Hebrews 2:17, Romans 3; Mark 10:45; Romans 5:8; Hebrews 12; Ephesians 1; Psalm 22; Mathew 27:46; Psalm 69:1-36; Proverbs 17:15; Psalm 55; Isaiah 52:14; (among others)

    This is what I do not believe:

    I do not believe that God was wrathful to Christ; that God separated from Christ (withdrew His presence or His Spirit); that Jesus experienced God’s wrath; that God punished Jesus instead of punishing us; that Jesus experienced a “spiritual death”; that Jesus experienced what those who are condemned to Hell will experience; that sins are transferrable; that divine justice is retributive justice in type. I do not believe that God has condemned the Righteous in order to acquit the guilty.

    This is the reason for this post:

    I look forward to examining the passages @Enoch111 feels I've rejected in my view of Christ's work. My list is not by any means all inclusive but perhaps @Enoch111 knows of a couple that I have not only overlooked but I've mistakenly rejected in my stated belief. I just wanted to give us a good base from which to examine the verses he will provide.
     
  11. CharismaticLady

    CharismaticLady Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,740
    Likes Received:
    737
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    @Enoch111

    Penal Substitution is not the P in TULIP so why does anyone think this started in the Reformation? It is clearly Scripture. Arminians and Calvinists alike believe this.
     
  12. marks

    marks Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,194
    Likes Received:
    3,498
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    I
    Hi Enoch,

    Good posts!

    To me, is seems pretty crystal clear just in the passages, He has laid on Him the iniquity of us all, and, The soul that sins shall die (there's the penalty) that He died, but without sin, and that He has blotted out my certificate of debt - what I owed, that would be the penalty. The penalty that Jesus did not owe, that I did owe, that penalty of death. Because Jesus died, Paid in Full is written across my Handwriting.

    Not just substitution though, an ark for me to survive through. We are co-crucified with Jesus, yet alive. Jesus was our ark, Noah could not survive the waters, and we could not survive . . . what? I mean, we still die physically, Jesus' death didn't spare us from that! So what death was He sparing us from? So what did happen on the cross?

    Much love!
     
    Helen likes this.
  13. Mungo

    Mungo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,090
    Likes Received:
    168
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    The problem with Penal Substitution is four fold.
    1. The punishment for sin is eternal separation from God – but Jesus is not eternally separated from God.
    2. God would be legally punishing an innocent person for the sins of another.
    3. If the legal debt has been paid then no-one can be condemned for sin since then God would be taking double payment for the same debt.
    4. There is no need for God’s mercy since the debt has been paid. Mercy implies reduction or “letting off” of some or all the debt of punishment.
    Moreover the whole theory introduced conflict into the Godhead The whole idea is grotesque.
     
    Giuliano likes this.
  14. Mungo

    Mungo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,090
    Likes Received:
    168
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    That would not be justice.
    How would it be just to punish an innocent man instead of the guilty one?
     
    John Caldwell likes this.
  15. Mungo

    Mungo Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,090
    Likes Received:
    168
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    No it isn't. You are reading into it what is not there.
     
    John Caldwell likes this.
  16. Ernest T. Bass

    Ernest T. Bass Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    808
    Likes Received:
    285
    1) how could Christ die on the cross as a substitute for me when I have never been appointed to go to a cross and die myself? I know of no place in the Bible Jesus said He was taking my place on a cross.

    2) if all the guilt and penalty of sin has been 'imputed' into Christ, then why is it that all men must appear before God in judgment and give account of himself to God, Romans 14:10-12 and God renders to every man according to his deeds, Romans 2:6? Evidently Christ has not taken on all the guilt and penalty of sin for man when man must still give account and take responsibility for his deeds.

    3) a consequence, penalty of sin since sin entered the world is physical death, all men have been appointed to die, (Hebrews 9:27). Christ did not physically die for us on HIs cross so here is a 'penalty' of sin that was not imputed to Christ. Another consequence, penalty of sin is spiritual death (Romans 6:23). This implies that Christ must have taken on my sins and become a sinner Himself, that is, Jesus died spiritually so I would not have to. For this reason alone the idea of penal substitution should be rejected wholly and completely. Christ was separate from sinners, (Hebrews 7:26)

    I posted what Calvinist Albert Barnes (2 Corinthians 5:21) said about this in another thread on this topic and think it is worth repeating (in blue with my emphasis) about Christ taking on man's sin becoming a sinner and dying spiritually for man so man would not have to:

    --Can it mean that he (Christ) was a sinner, for it is said in immediate connection that he “knew no sin,” and it is everywhere said that he was holy, harmless, undefiled.


    -- Can it mean that he was, in any proper sense of the word, guilty, for no one is truly guilty who is not personally a transgressor of the Law; and if he was, in any proper sense, guilty, then he deserved to die, and his death could have no more merit than that of any other guilty being; and if he was properly guilty it would make no difference in this respect whether it was by his own fault or by imputation: a guilty being deserves to be punished; and where there is desert of punishment there can be no merit in sufferings.

    But all such views as go to make the Holy Redeemer a sinner, or guilty, or deserving of the sufferings which he endured, border on blasphemy, and are abhorrent to the whole strain of the Scriptures. In no form, in no sense possible, is it to be maintained that the Lord Jesus was sinful or guilty. It is a corner stone of the whole system of religion, that in all conceivable senses of the expression he was holy, and pure, and the object of the divine approbation. And every view which fairly leads to the statement that he was in any sense guilty, or which implies that he deserved to die, is “prima facie” a false view, and should be at once abandoned.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2019
    Giuliano and Mungo like this.
  17. Ernest T. Bass

    Ernest T. Bass Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    808
    Likes Received:
    285
    I think the idea here is that according to penal substitution all of one's sins, the guilt and penalty of sin has been unconditionally transferred to Christ therefore you will never be held guilty or accountable for ANY sins, past, present or future that you commit so you are therefore "once saved always saved" or as Calvinists call it 'perseverance of the Saints'.
     
  18. CharismaticLady

    CharismaticLady Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,740
    Likes Received:
    737
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Okay, definitely Calvinist, not Arminian nor scripture.
     
    John Caldwell likes this.
  19. Ernest T. Bass

    Ernest T. Bass Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    808
    Likes Received:
    285

    Also, if all of our sins past, present and future have UNCONDIONALLY been transferred/imputed to Christ and in turn Christ's righteousness is UNCONDITONALLY transferred to the sinner, that means these UNconditions would bring about Universalism. To get around this problem Calvin came up with the idea of limited atonement. Therefore penal substitution applies only to those Calvinism calls 'elect'. And it is this Calvinistic 'elect' that will be irresistibly saved by grace. So penal substitution provides bases for the LIP in TULIP.

    But the Bible does not teach sin or guilt of sin is unconditionally transferred to Christ or that Christ's righteousness is transferred to the sinner. (If Christ's righteousness was transferred to us then we would be as perfectly sinless as Christ...but we are not.)
    To have sins forgiven so one can then be justified by Christ, one must be obedient to the will of God and submit to baptism where the blood of Christ cleanses sins away, God cuts away the body of sin in baptism Colossians 2:11-13 hence sins are not transferred to Christ but taken away, removed, cut away. And the obedient person puts on Christ (Galatians 3:27) thereby being in Christ one is now in Christ's perfect righteousness and therefore seen as perfectly righteous by God.
    Again, the obedient are put in Christ's perfect righteousness and not Christ's perfect righteousness is unconditionally put in the sinner while the sinner sits idle not obeying God.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2019
    Mungo likes this.
  20. John Caldwell

    John Caldwell Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    574
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Bump.
     
Loading...