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

  • 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!

Episkopos

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2011
12,795
19,242
113
65
Montreal
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
You are confused.

I am not asking that the words "Penal Substitution Theory" appear in Scripture. I am asking for verses stating the elements of the theory.

I am asking for a verse that states Adam died spiritually.

I am asking for a verse that states God poured His wrath upon Christ.

I am asking for a verse that states Christ died instead of us dying.

I am asking for a verse that states God condemned His "Righteous One".

I am asking for a verse that states Christ's suffering was divine punishment.

I am asking for a verse that edviences divine justice to be retributive justice in type.

By your own admission they do not exist.

This is why Penal Substitution Theory is a theory.

Not only do you believe all of those extra-biblical ideas but you use them as a foundation of your faith as you lean not on God's Word but your own understanding.

The evidence is plain. It was when you accused me of rejecting Scripture yet proved incompetent in providing even one passage those of us who disagree with your theory reject.

I encourage you to turn to Scripture in your studies rather than theory, myth, and superstition. Make God's Word rather than religious philosophy the foundation of your faith.

I do not care about your opinions about what you believe God meant to say. I care about what God actually said.


I don't think that the bible is a book that makes too many overtly obvious statements. There is a lot of mystery involved. I think it works more like...when a person has the right attitude and understanding...the bible makes sense.

Of course there are man-made constructs that SEEM to make sense when narrowly viewed...but these errant viewpoints are laid to rest by seeing the bigger picture. So we need to look back to see how things work together.

So there is a place for deductive reasoning...but always from a spiritual perspective.


While I see where people get the penal substitution doctrine from...I do see that as a heresy based on an overly narrow viewpoint that contradicts the weight of scripture that says otherwise. Ie...The crucifixion of Jesus was NOT God's day of wrath...which is yet to come. Rather it was the evil in the world that crucified Jesus.

That is plain....in spite of various wordings in some places that look like God was dumping His own wrath on His holy Son....which can only be understood if one is religious and looking for a religious formula...that itself is foreign to the biblical narrative when taken as a whole.

So it's a construct of the devil meant to disparage God. Therefore it will be popular among they who have no spiritual understanding and life.

John, your list has many facets that cannot be taken as a whole.

We see that the devil infiltrated into the world at the fall of Adam...so as to become the world's power...the influence of his rebellion overpowering the subtle pull of God's influence...even though it doesn't explicitly say this in one text. But we do know that the "power of the air" is now in the devil's hands.

Jesus won back this world through His sacrifice. This was a spiritual victory that will soon be shown to be eternally effective.

So God is saving more and more people. That is specifically stated as the reason for the delay in governmental change. What is not stated but can be deduced is that in every generation God is flushing out...not just the faithful...but also the rebellious....they who teach iniquity.

So then just as God flushed out evil among His angels...so in His master strategy men are being exposed in the same way.

Did Adam die spiritually on the day he sinned?

The whole world did.

The devil squatted in the heavenly principality that governs the influence in the world...the very place that the saints will rule from in the next age.
 
Last edited:

John Caldwell

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2019
1,704
973
113
North Augusta
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I don't think that the bible is a book that makes too many overtly obvious statements. There is a lot of mystery involved. I think it works more like...when a person has the right attitude and understanding...the bible makes sense.

Of course there are man-made constructs that SEEM to make sense when narrowly viewed...but these errant viewpoints are laid to rest by seeing the bigger picture. So we need to look back to see how things work together.

So there is a place for deductive reasoning...but always from a spiritual perspective.


While I see where people get the penal substitution doctrine from...I do see that as a heresy based on an overly narrow viewpoint that contradicts the weight of scripture that says otherwise. Ie...The crucifixion of Jesus was NOT God's day of wrath...which is yet to come. Rather it was the evil in the world that crucified Jesus.

That is plain....in spite of various wordings in some places that look like God was dumping His own wrath on His holy Son....which can only be understood if one is religious and looking for a religious formula...that itself is foreign to the biblical narrative when taken as a whole.

So it a construct of the devil meant to disparage God. Therefore it will be popular among they who have no spiritual understanding and life.

John, your list has many facets that cannot be taken as a whole.

We see that the devil infiltrated into the world at the fall of Adam...so as to become the world's power...the influence of his rebellion overpowering the subtle pull of God's influence...even though it doesn't explicitly say this in one text. But we do know that the "power of the air" is now in the devil's hands.

Jesus won back this world through His sacrifice. This was a spiritual victory that will soon be shown to be eternally effective.

So God is saving more and more people. That is specifically stated as the reason for the delay in governmental change. What is not stated but can be deduced is that in every generation God is flushing out...not just the faithful...but also the rebellious....they who teach iniquity.

So then just as God flushed out evil among His angels...so in His master strategy men are being exposed in the same way.

Did Adam die spiritually on the day he sinned?

The whole world did.

The devil squatted in the heavenly principality that governs the influence in the world...the very place that the saints will rule from in the next age.
I agree. The issue, however, is that we have to be able to explain how we arrive at our conclusions and interpretation. We should also be able distinguish between God's Word and our understanding.

There are many who hold Penal Substitution Theory and can explain the philosophies and reasoning that they use to arrive at their conclusions. I have read good explanations by John Piper and even John Calvin. I disagree with their presuppositions but not the passages they use.

That is the difference (and my point) here. @David Taylor, @Enoch111, and @Steve Owen do not even recognize their presuppositions, much less are they able to defend the ideas. They purpose to tell us what Scripture really means but cannot say why.

The aggravating part is this means there is nothing really to discuss because they just assume anyone who disagrees with them rejects Scripture rather than their interpretation of Scripture.

This is the danger of indoctrination regardless of the validity of the doctrine actually held.

(BTW, I agree with your conclusions except the concept of dying spiritually).
 

reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2019
4,618
1,481
113
Somewhere in the USA
reformedtruths.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I agree. The issue, however, is that we have to be able to explain how we arrive at our conclusions and interpretation. We should also be able distinguish between God's Word and our understanding.

There are many who hold Penal Substitution Theory and can explain the philosophies and reasoning that they use to arrive at their conclusions. I have read good explanations by John Piper and even John Calvin. I disagree with their presuppositions but not the passages they use.

That is the difference (and my point) here. @David Taylor, @Enoch111, and @Steve Owen do not even recognize their presuppositions, much less are they able to defend the ideas. They purpose to tell us what Scripture really means but cannot say why.

The aggravating part is this means there is nothing really to discuss because they just assume anyone who disagrees with them rejects Scripture rather than their interpretation of Scripture.

This is the danger of indoctrination regardless of the validity of the doctrine actually held.
You absolutely are rejecting Scripture John.
 

reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2019
4,618
1,481
113
Somewhere in the USA
reformedtruths.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No one is rejecting that God is both just and the justifier of sinners.

I do not care about your hermeneutics because I believe your method flawed (we all have to decide our standards here).

I agree that you gave me a lot of verses. The problem is that you have not provided any that prove or even state the elements you assume in Penal Substitution Theory.

Penal Substitution Theory is humanistic philosophy (it is founded in 16th century humanism). It elevates man and human sin above God. It is human philosophy. And it is unbiblical as evidenced by the fact you are unable to provide even one verse stating the elements that make up the theory.
@Steve Owen John suffers from head in sand and "NUH UH THAT IS NOT WHAT IT SAYS BECAUSE I DON"T WANT TO BELIEVE IT" syndrome.
 

reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2019
4,618
1,481
113
Somewhere in the USA
reformedtruths.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I know a lot of my presuppositions and have mentioned them here. We have to be able to know our influences. You do not.
Which, of course, is a lie. But Substutionary Atonement is plainly in Scripture.

You still have yet to adequately explain, according to your viewpoint, if God could just forgive, if the penalty did not have to be paid, what was the point of Jesus dying on the cross? Why was that necessary?
 

John Caldwell

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2019
1,704
973
113
North Augusta
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You absolutely are rejecting Scripture John.
This is a lie (and deliberate dishonesty beneath a Christian, much less a "pastor"). This highlights the problem of indoctrination and why, in my opinion, David is not qualified to be a pastor. Our churches place people in positions far too early.

I have not rejected Scripture but instead have rejected @David Taylor 's interpretation of Scripture. In fact, I reject his interpretation in favor of another interpretation within orthodox Christianity.

That David sees rejection of his interpretation and what he believes implied in Scripture as a rejection of Scripture itself is heresy. David has elevated himself in the place of God and his interpretation over God's Word. This is a cult-like mentality.

The Church is elevating too many immature Christians into leadership positions. This is a disservice to both the churches and the people they elevate as it stifles maturity. Those like @David Taylor could use seasoning which often goes far smoothing out indoctrination.

People will have different interpretations. What Christians should be able to do is explain and discuss their differences - not accuse servants of Another of rejecting God's Word for rejecting their ideas.
 
Last edited:

reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2019
4,618
1,481
113
Somewhere in the USA
reformedtruths.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
This is a lie (and deliberate dishonesty beneath a Christian, much less a "pastor"). This highlights the problem of indoctrination and why, in my opinion, David is not qualified to be a pastor. Our churches place people in positions far too early.
Glad you don't make the qualifications for pastor then, Scripture does. It is not a lie. You HAVE rejected Scripture and you don't even know it.
That David sees rejection of his interpretation and what he believes implied in Scripture as a rejection of Scripture itself is heresy. David has elevated himself in the place of God and his interpretation over God's Word. This is a cult-like mentality.
No, again, more lies, I DO NOT believe it is implied, but explicit in Scripture. Just not in one singular passage that you make the requirement which is ridiculous.

People will have different interpretations. What Christians should be able to do is explain and discuss their differences - not accuse servants of Another of rejecting God's Word for rejecting their ideas.
This is true for SOME doctrines (such as end times) but not on major doctrines such as the atonement.
 

VictoryinJesus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,581
7,857
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
John 15:25 But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause.

...seems important to this thread.
 

VictoryinJesus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,581
7,857
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I believe Christ died for our sins, suffered the penalty for our sins and we are redeemed by His blood and in Him we escape the wrath to come.

escaping the wrath to come is coming out of and from the wrath that is upon the world. Coming out of the ways of the world and coming out from darkness and coming out from death into the Light of Life. In saying Jesus was our substitute (not that you have only addressing the overall topic of thread); as our substitute instead of “the way to Life”. He said to Learn of Him. Not Learn of Him as a substitute but as “the way” to Enter INTO Life. In the passage of being in subjection to the Father of Spirits and Live ...chastisement of Sons remove them out from the world although still in it...setting them apart from wrath (not appointed to wrath but Mercy). What is: although a Son, He learned obedience through the things He suffered. In speaking of the chastisement of God ...it is God’s good pleasure to give His children the kingdom. His good pleasure for His children is profitable in removing (separating) them from (out of)flesh into Spirit. His chastisement is for the children’s profit...that begins with “although He was a Son, He learned obedience through suffering.” It is the Spirit which profits as His words are Life. The Father of Spirit’s chastises His children to remove them (set them apart) (cut) (separate) (divide) them out from the wrath upon the world. In that same passage the word contrasts the chastisement of God with an earthly fathers chastisement who after their own pleasure “for a few days” correct their sons to gain the world...instead of loosing it. God’s chastises His children to loose the world that they gain(Profit) Life of the Son.
 

Jay Ross

Well-Known Member
Jun 20, 2011
6,760
2,523
113
QLD
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Hello

This whole thread seems to be between a number of people who have a ticket in their hands to board a train at a station, but are arguing on the platform about how the ticket was paid for. The ticket tells us that they can board the train, but they are more concerned with the argument and want the argument resolved before they will board the train. Sadly, the train's time of departure cannot be held up by the attempts to resolve the dilemma and it will depart on time whether or not the people arguing on the platform have boarded the train or not.

How important is this bickering when all that is required is to board the train.

Shalom

PS: - It seems to me that the logs in their respective eyes is not letting them see their predicament of not boarding the train. The bickering is more important/exciting to resolve than acting on the promises they have been given. I know that how God intends to work out the "cost" of the tickets is not my concern. My only concern is to walk in faith and to accept the ticket for the train and board it.
 

Steve Owen

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2019
385
267
63
72
Exmouth UK
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
The crucifixion of Jesus was NOT God's day of wrath...which is yet to come. Rather it was the evil in the world that crucified Jesus.
I'm not aware that anyone has stated that the crucifixion was God's day of wrath. God forbid! I believe the exact opposite. The cross is the place where God's love and His justice meet; where John 3:16 and Romans 3:25-26 are reconciled.
As for who crucified the Lord Jesus, read Acts 4:27-28. The 19th Century English preacher Octavius Winslow wrote: "Who delivered Jesus up to die? Not Judas for money. Not the Jews for envy [Matthew 27:18]. Not Pilate for fear. But the Father for love."
 

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,996
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
While I see where people get the penal substitution doctrine from...I do see that as a heresy based on an overly narrow viewpoint that contradicts the weight of scripture that says otherwise.
The heresy is in DENYING the Penal Substitution doctrine and dismissing its significance.
Ie...The crucifixion of Jesus was NOT God's day of wrath...which is yet to come. Rather it was the evil in the world that crucified Jesus.
This is COMPLETELY FALSE. As Jesus Himself said, He could have called down twelve legions of angels from Heaven, and they would have ensured that no enemy of God or Christ could place Him on that cross. No evil in the world could have touched the Son of God without His express permission. But that was not God's plan of redemption.

It is God the Father Himself who sent His only begotten Son into the world to become S-I-N for us. And God's wrath is totally against sin, and is the penalty for sin. This was not the day of wrath which is to come, but the day on which the SWORD of God's wrath in justice came down with full force upon the soul of Christ.

Here is what God said in advance Zech 13:7): 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.

Who is the Shepherd other than Christ?
Who is the Man who is the fellow of God other than Christ?
What is this Sword other than a metaphor for the wrath of God?

MATTHEW HENRY'S COMMENTARY ON ZECH 13:7

Here is a prophecy,

I. Of the sufferings of Christ, of him who was to be pierced, and was to be the fountain opened. Awake, O sword! against my Shepherd,

v. 7. These are the words of God the Father, giving order and commission to the sword of his justice to awake against his Son, when he had voluntarily made his soul an offering for sin; for it pleased the Lord to bruise him and put him to grief; and he was stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted, Isa. 53:4, 10.

Observe,

1. How he calls him. "As God, he is my fellow;" for he thought it no robbery to be equal with God. He and the Father are one. He was from eternity by him, as one brought up with him, and, in the work of man’s redemption, he was his elect, in whom his soul delighted, and the counsel of peace was between them both. "As Mediator, he is my Shepherd, that great and good Shepherd that undertook to feed the flock," ch. 11:7. He is the Shepherd that was to lay down his life for the sheep.

2. How he uses him: Awake, O sword! against him. If he will be a sacrifice, he must be slain, for without the shedding of blood, the life-blood, there was no remission. men thrust him through as the good Shepherd (compare v. 3), that he might purchase the flock of God with his own blood, Acts 20:28. It is not a charge given to a rod to correct him, but to a sword to slay him; for Messiah the prince must be cut off, but not for himself, Dan. 9:26.

It is not the sword of war that receives this charge, that he may die in the bed of honour, but the sword of justice, that he may die as a criminal, upon an ignominious tree. This sword must awake against him; he having no sin of his own to answer for, the sword of justice had nothing to say to him of itself, till, by particular order from the Judge of all, it was warranted to brandish itself against him. he was the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, in the decree and counsel of God; but the sword designed against him had long slumbered, till now at length it is called upon to awake, not, "Awake, and smite him; strike home; not with a drowsy blow, but an awakened one;" for God spared not his own Son.
 

John Caldwell

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2019
1,704
973
113
North Augusta
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The heresy is in DENYING the Penal Substitution doctrine and dismissing its significance.

This is COMPLETELY FALSE. As Jesus Himself said, He could have called down twelve legions of angels from Heaven, and they would have ensured that no enemy of God or Christ could place Him on that cross. No evil in the world could have touched the Son of God without His express permission. But that was not God's plan of redemption.

It is God the Father Himself who sent His only begotten Son into the world to become S-I-N for us. And God's wrath is totally against sin, and is the penalty for sin. This was not the day of wrath which is to come, but the day on which the SWORD of God's wrath in justice came down with full force upon the soul of Christ.

Here is what God said in advance Zech 13:7): 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.

Who is the Shepherd other than Christ?
Who is the Man who is the fellow of God other than Christ?
What is this Sword other than a metaphor for the wrath of God?

MATTHEW HENRY'S COMMENTARY ON ZECH 13:7

Here is a prophecy,

I. Of the sufferings of Christ, of him who was to be pierced, and was to be the fountain opened. Awake, O sword! against my Shepherd,

v. 7. These are the words of God the Father, giving order and commission to the sword of his justice to awake against his Son, when he had voluntarily made his soul an offering for sin; for it pleased the Lord to bruise him and put him to grief; and he was stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted, Isa. 53:4, 10.

Observe,

1. How he calls him. "As God, he is my fellow;" for he thought it no robbery to be equal with God. He and the Father are one. He was from eternity by him, as one brought up with him, and, in the work of man’s redemption, he was his elect, in whom his soul delighted, and the counsel of peace was between them both. "As Mediator, he is my Shepherd, that great and good Shepherd that undertook to feed the flock," ch. 11:7. He is the Shepherd that was to lay down his life for the sheep.

2. How he uses him: Awake, O sword! against him. If he will be a sacrifice, he must be slain, for without the shedding of blood, the life-blood, there was no remission. men thrust him through as the good Shepherd (compare v. 3), that he might purchase the flock of God with his own blood, Acts 20:28. It is not a charge given to a rod to correct him, but to a sword to slay him; for Messiah the prince must be cut off, but not for himself, Dan. 9:26.

It is not the sword of war that receives this charge, that he may die in the bed of honour, but the sword of justice, that he may die as a criminal, upon an ignominious tree. This sword must awake against him; he having no sin of his own to answer for, the sword of justice had nothing to say to him of itself, till, by particular order from the Judge of all, it was warranted to brandish itself against him. he was the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, in the decree and counsel of God; but the sword designed against him had long slumbered, till now at length it is called upon to awake, not, "Awake, and smite him; strike home; not with a drowsy blow, but an awakened one;" for God spared not his own Son.
What makes Penal Substitution Theory a heresy is not the fact it is a theory foreign to actual Scripture (from the biblical text) but the Truth the theory obscures.

There is a reason Christ was delivered by the Jews to suffer and die at the hands of wicked men.
 
Last edited:

reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2019
4,618
1,481
113
Somewhere in the USA
reformedtruths.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
What makes Penal Substitution Theory a heresy is not the fact it is a theory foreign to actual Scripture (from the biblical text) but the Truth the theory obscures.

There is a reason Christ was delivered by the Jews to suffer and die at the hands of wicked men.
So, for the 13th time, why did Christ have to die John?
 

John Caldwell

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2019
1,704
973
113
North Augusta
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So, for the 13th time, why did Christ have to die John?
Again, I think that Jesus suffered and died to give Him the human experience of obedience even in agony (this is some of @marks words in relation to suffering - but I said the same using the expression that Christ "experienced what it is to be man"). I think that He died for us not so that we avoid a physical death, but to give our physical death a different outcome.



Do you believe that the penalty for sin is death?

If so, is that a punishment that Christ suffered instead of us suffering?

If so, then why do we die physically (if Christ suffered this punishment instead of us)?

If we are not spared physical death, then why did Christ have to die?
 
Last edited:

Ernest T. Bass

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2014
1,845
616
113
out in the woods
Hello

This whole thread seems to be between a number of people who have a ticket in their hands to board a train at a station, but are arguing on the platform about how the ticket was paid for. The ticket tells us that they can board the train, but they are more concerned with the argument and want the argument resolved before they will board the train. Sadly, the train's time of departure cannot be held up by the attempts to resolve the dilemma and it will depart on time whether or not the people arguing on the platform have boarded the train or not.

How important is this bickering when all that is required is to board the train.

Shalom

PS: - It seems to me that the logs in their respective eyes is not letting them see their predicament of not boarding the train. The bickering is more important/exciting to resolve than acting on the promises they have been given. I know that how God intends to work out the "cost" of the tickets is not my concern. My only concern is to walk in faith and to accept the ticket for the train and board it.
I see the argument being between obedience to the will of God that justifies (Romans 6:16-18) and faith only that does not justify (James 2:24). Penal substitution is an attempt to justify the sinner by faith only apart from obedience.