My full defense of PSA

[Dizerner]

church history thinks Mary died a virgin, She is the mother of God. the eucharist is Jesus literal blood and flesh.

They only want it when it's convenient to them, lol.

 

[civic]

church history thinks Mary died a virgin, She is the mother of God. the eucharist is Jesus literal blood and flesh.

I will take the word of God over history of men.

Gods justice was satisfied. this is penal substitution 101

if his justice is not satisfied. then we are still dead in our sin

Nope church history does not believe that, the Catholics do. Nice try though

 

[civic]

They only want it when it's convenient to them, lol.

False teaching entered the church during the time of the apostles.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

They only want it when it's convenient to them, lol.

I will give @civic benefit of doubt and not judge him

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Nope church history does not believe that, the Catholics do. Nice try though

Who do you think wrote church history

They destroyed any documents that did not agree with their theology and jailed or executed anyone they considered a heretics

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

False teaching entered the church during the time of the apostles.

Yes amen. All the apostles fought them different types of false teachers

 

[Dizerner]

Who do you think wrote church history

I firmly believe the real church was often invisible to history and not in the spotlight.

 

[Dizerner]

I will give @civic benefit of doubt and not judge him

I am not "judging" his heart, I am "judging" his actions.

And Scripture says I can do that.

He bails on the fathers when he doesn't like them, and then says "No one before Calvin!" when he wants his argument to win.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

I firmly believe the real church was often invisible to history and not in the spotlight.

Oh God kept his church. I agree they had to meet underground to keep the Roman church from snuffing them out

 

[civic]

Who do you think wrote church history

They destroyed any documents that did not agree with their theology and jailed or executed anyone they considered a heretics

That began with Augustine , he is their father

 

[civic]

I am not "judging" his heart, I am "judging" his actions.

And Scripture says I can do that.

He bails on the fathers when he doesn't like them, and then says "No one before Calvin!" when he wants his argument to win.

Look none of the ECFs were inspired and many of them taught numerous errors

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

That began with Augustine , he is their father

like I said, when they came to power. they had a book burning party. any history not written in the word that did not fit their theology was burned..

so if your expectring to find some things.. You will be hard pressed to see anything

it does not mean no one thought or believe it

but thats why I stick to the bible.. It was not tainted. (although the english language can miss some fine points) and can be trusted

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Look none of the ECFs were inspired and many of them taught numerous errors

another reason to stick to the word of God.

it is living and powerfull, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

also, as paul said to timothy,

2 tim 3: 15 and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 hat the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

 

[civic]

another reason to stick to the word of God.

it is living and powerfull, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

also, as paul said to timothy,

2 tim 3: 15 and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 hat the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Agreed which is why I reject PSA which doctrine began at the reformation just like tulip did .

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Agreed which is why I reject PSA which doctrine began at the reformation just like tulip did .

its in the word. so it did not start at the reformation.

You failed in listening to my point

penal is just another word used in a court of law.

when a person is convicted of a crime, they are given a sentence which that person must pay for his sins (as I heard the other day, we have free will i what we can chose. but we do not have free will on the consequences)

God told adam the result of he sinned against him, he would die.. And he did. the day he sinned, you can see the huge change in Adam and eve both.. the things of God became foolishness to them, because they died.. they died to God (spiritually) and they died to truth. They had to be restored to fellowship with God. and Jesus showed them how. The death of an innocent was a symbol of what Christ would do when he came, gen 3" 15 being the first messianic prophecy.

Thats why jesus did on the cross. he took our sin, so he could be the substitute to be judged for our sin, so we could be set free and be restored to a right relationship with him

this is the message of the bible from genesis to revelation.

 

[atpollard]

like I said, when they came to power. they had a book burning party. any history not written in the word that did not fit their theology was burned..

Like Josephus, the anti-Christian Jewish Scholar and Historian?

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Like Josephus, the anti-Christian Jewish Scholar and Historian?

He wrote history not church doctrine.

 

[TomL]

I posted much of this before but it's all over in different places and hard to find, so here is my summary of defense for PSA.


ALL other theories of atonement, and I do mean ALL, can only have meaning if derived from the ideas of sin and its punishment. WHY are we even in this mess? Why does God have to FIX anything at all? What is it God is even fixing? Without a thorough understanding of what sin and its punishment entails. you are lost in the water, you are floundering. The ONLY reason that makes any sense for God to become a man and die, to save the world, forgive sins, defeat death, defeat the devil, be a good influence, establish his government, and ransom everyone back, is this:

The punishment of sin creates all the problems, and sin must be fully judged for God to redeem.

Jesus judges sin on the Cross, and "payment" language permeates all of Scripture.

God became a man and died for one reason: to suffer the punishment sin deserves.


Here's the deal:

God can defeat the devil and death without becoming a man and dying; why does he need to do it that way?

Makes no sense.

God can influence people and display his government without becoming a man and dying; why does he need to do it that way?

Makes no sense.

God can ransom people back and prove himself innocent, without becoming a man and dying; why does he need to do it that way?

Makes no sense.


Ever heard the saying, "There's no such thing as a free lunch?"

Or how about, "A shortcut seldom is?"


We know, even if the lunch comes to us free, someone, somewhere paid for it.

And it is interesting just how much Scripture uses "payment" language in both the OT and the NT, this is very significant.


But what is essentially being said by denying PSA is:

Jesus can pay for us, without really paying.

That's the argument, logically, from the anti-PSA crowd.

It's not about God being angry, we already know there are instances of this.

It's not about God punishing God, or breaking up the Trinity, or suffering an eternity of wrath, we know all things are possible for God, it's a relational not ontological break, an infinite being can suffer in finite time what a finite being can suffer infinitely, God can experience himself negatively, none of those are real problems.

It's about the holiness of God demanding punishment for sin. And yet if all we emphasize is "God is all love" language, we deny a very vital, essential, and integral part of God, his justice. God is not just love. Else there would be no punishment, no judgment, no hell, no wrath anywhere at all, no diseases, viruses, pain, suffering, torture, abuse, neglect, unfairness, loneliness, sadness, unhappiness, violence, evil.


God is not just love.

If God were JUST love—think of it—God would allow anybody to do anything.

God would not have enemies, if he were JUST love.

God would send Satan flowers every morning and make him a fresh cup of coffee, if God were JUST love.

God would never rebuke or warn or threaten anyone, if God were JUST love.

There would be nothing painful or confusing or offensive or hard, if God were JUST love.

If God were JUST love, there would be no need to punish sin.... ever.


Now there are those who try to change the word punishment with a watered down version they just call "consequences." But this is just a semantic game removing the moral guilt element inherent in committing an evil action. If I trip walking down some stairs, that's a consequence of my actions, but there is no morally wrong aspect to what I did, there is no guilt. If we just redefine "if you do something evil and have something bad happen to you as a result of what you deserve" with the term "consequence," all we did was put a new word to the same meaning as "punishment." What is being attempted here, is removing moral guilt from sinful actions, and a removal of God's rightful acting role as Judge and dispenser of justice, as if "karma" takes over the job from God.


So what we see here, is that people who deny PSA, are denying an essential attribute of God:

God's hatred for sin, God's necessary judgment on sin.
So they "rewrite" the Cross to be about anything BUT judging sin.

The Cross is about God being willing to show he will suffer.
But not judgment on sin.

The Cross is about God being a super nice fella' who is willing to get beat up and killed.
But not judgment on sin.

The Cross is about God showing he's in charge and governs the world.
But not judgment on sin.

The Cross is about God beating up the devil and giving him a big black eye.
But not judgment on sin.

The Cross is about God defeating death and giving creation a brand new chance.
But not judgment on sin!

The Cross is about Jesus being a great example to us, and inspiring us to die like him.
But not judgment... on our sins.


See how that tricky "swapparoo" happens in this shell game, where we sneak out one of God's essential attributes? Anti-PSA advocates, like those who deny the Trinity, like to claim there is no verse to support God has to judge sin with wrath on his Son. But, like the Trinity, there are clear and obvious deductions we cannot escape from, and God expects us to make deductions in the Bible.

There is no verse that says God skips over justice. There is no verse that says God will leave sin unpunished. And yet they try to take verses that express God's forgiveness won through the Cross and through Jesus' suffering, and neuter and rip out the actual sacrificial element of Christ that is made to suffer for the sins of the world, as if God can just skip over his own holiness!

Anti-PSA is a spiritual "free lunch."

The Law doesn't bring wrath under this scenario, because Jesus never really has to pay for our sins. But the whole reason Jesus said he came, the cup of redemption in his blood for the forgiveness, the basis of the ransom, was the true actual substitution in our place. "The Law brings wrath," but it's not true, if we all sinned against the Law, yet there was no wrath against our sins, it all just magically disappears without honoring God's holiness.

That's striking at the very CORE of the Gospel, the DEEPEST and MOST CENTRAL reason Christ came to die, to die in our place, to suffer what we should have gotten.

Not less—God's integrity uses equal weights and measures.


There's a great advertisement for sugar I once saw, it is short and gets your attention:

"Sugar. There is no substitute."

Now we all know they are always trying to find a substitute for sugar, because everyone has a sweet tooth. But there is a substance and authenticity that an artificial substitute just never has to the original. What we are being offered here, is a spiritual "artificial substitute" for the punishment of our sins. Jesus does not have to really fulfill the Law's punishment, he doesn't really have to pay, he just has to physically die the first death, and never the second.


All other theories of the atonement derive from Jesus paying the penalty for sin.

Jesus paying a ransom, Jesus conquering death, Jesus conquering the devil, Jesus being a a good moral influence, Jesus conquering sin, Jesus redeeming the suffering and imperfections of creation.

All these bad things that need redeeming all came from the creation's rebellion, all these things came from the original sins, all these things are curses and judgments that came as a consequence of what each of our sin deserves—

There is no "problem" Jesus "solves" that is not in some way connected to "sin"!! The atonement of Jesus Christ is not just a good example, a legal loophole, fighting the bad guys, or doing a good deed for humanity. The atonement of Jesus Christ and all the good things that come from it are based in one thing, the Law bringing wrath.

Jesus is judged with the consequences of what sinning against a holy God deserves on our behalf.

Christ suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, to bring us to God. He made him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. The Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all, it pleased the Lord to bruise him, his soul became a guilt offering.

He takes the bullet, he takes the fall, he takes the exact punishment we deserve.

That's the Gospel.

The 17 Claims of the Appeasement School (Atonement School), also called Penal Substitutionary Atonement.

1. Adam as mankind's federal head transmits the guilt of his sin to all mankind. (Augustine)*
2. Because of Original Sin mankind is now totally depraved. (Augustine)*
3. Even Infants, innocent of personal sin, are guilty of Original Sin. (Augustine)*
4. The sin of Adam infinitely offends God because the gravity of the offense depends on the worth of the one offended. (Anselm)
5. All sin is to be understood as a debt we owe God for the crime of having dishonored him. (Anselm)
6. Even Infants owe this debt. (Anslem)
7. In the Old Testament era, God insists that this debt be paid by shedding an innocent animal's blood. (Appeasement school)
8. God could have redeemed man by the simple act of wiling it... (Anselm)
9. ...but God cannot forgive sin without first punishing the sinner. (Anselm)
10. Not only must the redemption mirror the fall, but it must also be as painful as possible since the fall was easy. (Anselm)
11. Only the death of God-man is worthy to serve as a recompense to God for his offended honor. (Anselm)
12. Christ becomes incarnate so his humanity can suffer as a substitute for us. (Anselm)
13. God pours out His wrath on Christ pretending that Christ is we, the ones who actually deserve punishment (Appeasement School)
14. On the cross, Christ becomes literal sin and a literal curse. (Appeasement School)
15. God's eyes are too holy to look upon sin, so the Father turns his back on Christ, abandoning him. (Appeasement School)
16. Christ dies on the cross as an unblemished sacrifice and thereby removes the need for further sacrifice by appeasing God's wrath once and for all. (Appeasement School)
17. Thus Christ's death ransoms us from the wrath of God. (Anselm)