Correct, Ransom theory is definitely not PSA theory.Ransom is not PSA and the Ransom theory of the atonement is not penal substitution theory either. You have conflated them.
Correct, Ransom theory is definitely not PSA theory.Ransom is not PSA and the Ransom theory of the atonement is not penal substitution theory either. You have conflated them.
AmenCorrect, Ransom theory is definitely not PSA theory.
The early church Fathers held to ransom, moral influence and recapitulationAmen
Correct nothing penal for many centuries laterThe early church Fathers held to ransom, moral influence and recapitulation
Yep, Anselm's satisfaction theory had to come around 1100 a.d. as a sort of forerunner of PSACorrect nothing penal for many centuries later
DittoYep, Anselm's satisfaction theory had to come around 1100 a.d. as a sort of forerunner of PSA
If God had sent Esther to the world to preach the only way to man’s salvation, and PSA was the only way to be saved, we would expect Esther to have preached PSA.These kinds of objections are really terribly unfair.
It's like saying "Prove from the book of Esther that Jesus had to die for sins."
Yes mercy , grace, forgiveness, love, reconciliation, substitution, ransom , Passover is what we see taught throughout scripture regarding atonement , nothing penal, nothing about “ justice “ being served via atonement. It’s a mid evil model and how they taught justice/ penal law and invented those ideas from their culture and imposed them into scripture.If God had sent Esther to the world to preach the only way to man’s salvation, and PSA was the only way to be saved, we would expect Esther to have preached PSA.
So it is absolutely natural and logical to expect Jesus to make of PSA the center of his preaching, if PSA is essential.
Furthermore, if Jesus gave sermons specifically on the topic of forgiveness and salvation several times, it would be more than logical to expect PSA be taught CLEARLY and REPEATEDLY.
Progressive revelation does not imply that God hides for millennia a thing that is ESSENTIAL for man’s salvation.
It means that God deepens the understanding, changes language, images, metaphors, secondary laws, rituals, social organization, forms, ways, emphasis.
The understanding of King David may have been more limited than the understanding of Paul or your understanding. But King David, Paul and you are saved on the very same grounds: God’s grace, extended to those who reach out to Him with contrite heart, willing to change their ways.
I do think that the Bible resorts to a penal language.Yes mercy , grace, forgiveness, love, reconciliation, substitution, ransom , Passover is what we see taught throughout scripture regarding atonement , nothing penal, nothing about “ justice “ being served via atonement. It’s a mid evil model and how they taught justice/ penal law and invented those ideas from their culture and imposed them into scripture.
PSA only has 2 verses. One in Isaiah 53 that is used and one in psalm 22. Nothing at all that hints at it in the NT.One of the ways to understand Jesus mission, that non-Christians like me feel more connected with, is his mission as a Messenger.
It goes like this
Is the theory of Jesus mission as Messenger supported by the Bible?
- God sent Jesus with a Message about how to be saved (forgiven, reconciled, transformed to a new person).
- Jesus knew that delivering his Message would cost his life.
- Yet, Jesus went ahead and delivered his Message. He sacrificed so that we could get the Message.
- His Message is not only what He said, but how He lived: his own person, his example.
- So, every time we look at the cross, we are inspired to repent and crucify the old man to live a new life.
Of course… it is supported by Jesus Himself!
“For this reason I was born, and for this reason I came into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.” (John 18:37)
There are more verses, as many as those for the PSA and ransom models.