Penal Substitution is NOT a “Theory”

[marks]

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.

Jesus did say that all sins would be forgiven man excepting to blaspheme the Holy Spirit.

But it's not enough to be forgiven, you must be born again.

Much love!

 

[ScottA]

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.

If not for your #2 point, your #1 point would be moot and unnecessary.

Apparently you misunderstand the use of "in our place." But...it's not your fault, both are simply due to a poor choice of wording. In other words, you are correct to say "in our place" is not correct. But neither are they incorrect to say it in that way. But neither is wrong, it's all just confusion.

A more correct way of stating the truth, would be to say "in Christ" or "Christ in you"...which of course the scriptures do declare. In other words, we were "crucified with Christ." Which does indeed mean that claiming that He died "in our place", is not so much incorrect as it is a confession, giving Him the glory.

Strictly semantics.

 

[Mungo]

Apart from the problems I noted in post #13 there is another big problem for penal substitution and that is forgiveness.

All through the Bible, particularly the NT, there is a theme of forgiveness of sins
For example:
And you, child [JtB], will be called the prophet of the Most High;for you will go before the Lord to prepare his ways, to give knowledge of salvation to his people in the forgiveness of their sins, (LK 1:76-77)

Jesus saw their faith,° he said to the paralytic, “Child, your sins are forgiven (Mk 2:9)

be kind to one another, compassionate, forgiving one another as God has forgiven you in Christ.(EPh 4:32).

the prayer of faith will save the sick person, and the Lord will raise him up. If he has committed any sins, he will be forgiven.(James 5:15)

am writing to you, children, because your sins have been forgiven for his name’s sake. (1John 2:12)

Penal Substitution is incompatible with forgiveness.

 

[Enoch111]

Penal Substitution is incompatible with forgiveness.

This is TOTALLY NONSENSICAL. The only reason why any sinner is forgiven is because of Penal Substitution.

How is it that people claiming to be Christians have no clue about the core of the Gospel?

 

[Mungo]

This is TOTALLY NONSENSICAL. The only reason why any sinner is forgiven is because of Penal Substitution.

That is TOTALLY NONSENSICAL

A debt is either:
a) paid
b) forgiven (no payment is made)
c) remains with the debtor.

Take the parable of the unforgiving debtor.
That is why the kingdom of heaven may be likened to a king who decided to settle accounts with his servants. When he began the accounting, a debtor was brought before him who owed him a huge amount. Since he had no way of paying it back, his master ordered him to be sold, along with his wife, his children, and all his property, in payment of the debt. At that, the servant fell down, did him homage, and said, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay you back in full. Moved with compassion the master of that servant let him go and forgave him the loan. (Mt 18:23-27)

Who paid the servants debt?
Answer - no-one. The king forgave the debt.
If someone had paid it the servant would not still have owed it.

Penal substitution means the debt is paid not forgiven.
If a debt is forgiven then it is not paid. That is what forgiveness means.

How is it that people claiming to be Christians have no clue about the core of the Gospel?

Talkng about yourself again?

 

[CharismaticLady]

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. And the obedient person puts on Christ "Gal 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.

All Calvin would have had to do was read 2 Peter 1:9. It is only our past sins that were cleansed, not also our present and future sins. That knowledge would have brought him to the truth by him having to ask, so how do we not willfully sin in the present and future? The answer, a new nature - being born again of the Spirit.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Bump.

Bump to whom?

 

[CharismaticLady]

Jesus did say that all sins would be forgiven man excepting to blaspheme the Holy Spirit.

But it's not enough to be forgiven, you must be born again.

Much love!

Right. What needs to be born again is not only the awakening of our dead spirit, but changing our old carnal nature of flesh to the divine nature of the Spirit.

 

[John Caldwell]

If not for your #2 point, your #1 point would be moot and unnecessary.

Apparently you misunderstand the use of "in our place." But...it's not your fault, both are simply due to a poor choice of wording. In other words, you are correct to say "in our place" is not correct. But neither are they incorrect to say it in that way. But neither is wrong, it's all just confusion.

A more correct way of stating the truth, would be to say "in Christ" or "Christ in you"...which of course the scriptures do declare. In other words, we were "crucified with Christ." Which does indeed mean that claiming that He died "in our place", is not so much incorrect as it is a confession, giving Him the glory.

Strictly semantics.

True. My point is Scripture does not indicate what Christ suffered He suffered instead of us suffering it.

The difference is substitution (instead of us) vs representation (in our place).

 

[John Caldwell]

Bump to whom?

I don't remember...... Oh yea.... Bump to @Enoch111 as I asked for him to provide those verses I had rejected so that I can learn from that mistake.

 

[John Caldwell]

That is TOTALLY NONSENSICAL

A debt is either:
a) paid
b) forgiven (no payment is made)
c) remains with the debtor.

Take the parable of the unforgiving debtor.
That is why the kingdom of heaven may be likened to a king who decided to settle accounts with his servants. When he began the accounting, a debtor was brought before him who owed him a huge amount. Since he had no way of paying it back, his master ordered him to be sold, along with his wife, his children, and all his property, in payment of the debt. At that, the servant fell down, did him homage, and said, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay you back in full. Moved with compassion the master of that servant let him go and forgave him the loan. (Mt 18:23-27)

Who paid the servants debt?
Answer - no-one. The king forgave the debt.
If someone had paid it the servant would not still have owed it.

Penal substitution means the debt is paid not forgiven.
If a debt is forgiven then it is not paid. That is what forgiveness means.



Talkng about yourself again?

Exactly. That is the odd thing about Penal Substitution Theory.

It teaches the debt must be paid in order for it to be forgiven.

 

[marks]

The difference is substitution (instead of us) vs representation (in our place).

Hi John,

Curious . . . what is the difference between these? Why did Jesus die?

 

[John Caldwell]

Hi John,

Curious . . . what is the difference between these? Why did Jesus die?

"In our place" can refer to representation (a "second Adam", in the place of mankind) . "Instead of us" implies we would have suffered the same punishment.

I believe Christ had to become man and die at the hands of man to redeem mankind (again, this idea of another "Adam").

 

[CharismaticLady]

I don't remember...... Oh yea.... Bump to @Enoch111 as I asked for him to provide those verses I had rejected so that I can learn from that mistake.

That's what I like about you. You are humble and want truth more than being right. You're a real man. You also are not intimidated by searching the truth in contradictions, even if it means you have to dump denominationalism. I remember when I was 23 (I'm 72) and got the shock of my life. I learned the truth that grace replaced law. I gave up my childhood denomination and was never closed minded again. That's when I started growing exponentially. Then a few years ago I prayed to know God's meaning of every verse in the Bible. Another explosion followed.

 

[Enoch111]

A debt is either:
a) paid
b) forgiven (no payment is made)
c) remains with the debtor.

Still no concept of the finished work of Christ and the necessity of obedience to the Gospel. Sad.

 

[CharismaticLady]

True. My point is Scripture does not indicate what Christ suffered He suffered instead of us suffering it.

The difference is substitution (instead of us) vs representation (in our place).

I don't see much difference...

 

[marks]

I believe Christ had to become man and die at the hands of man to redeem mankind (again, this idea of another "Adam").

But why did Jesus have to die?

 

[marks]

"In our place" can refer to representation (a "second Adam", in the place of mankind) . "Instead of us" implies we would have suffered the same punishment.

I guess I don't know what you mean when you say "representation". Why "in the place of mankind"? Isn't that substitution?

much love!

 

[CharismaticLady]

But why did Jesus have to die?

Do you want my answer, or do you already know and are just asking John for his reason?

 

[marks]

Do you want my answer, or do you already know and are just asking John for his reason?

Asking John. Thank you!!