The 10 most Commonly referred to points against PSA

[civic]

In reading through the O.T. passages quoted in the N.T., we discover that the N.T. does not use the penal language that was developed during the Reformation in the dark ages as that was how that culture during that time had dealt with people in their judicial system punishing those who disagreed with them, torture and death were a result for many who went against their theology. That was the mentality of those who developed the doctrine we have today called the PSA atonement. There are many aspects and theories of the atonement that contain truth, and no one theory is 100% correct. There are many different views and aspects to the atonement within orthodoxy. The N.T. writers' emphasis on the atonement is on the side of expiation rather than propitiation, which is only used twice in the epistle of 1 John. Gods’ wrath is still future and will judge those who reject His Sons atonement for sin. Gods’ wrath was not poured out on the Son for sin otherwise there would be no future wrath from God because of sin. Jesus said: “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. The reason my Father loves Me is that I lay down My life—only to take it up again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of My own accord” (John 10:11; 17-18). Or again, while speaking to the multitudes, Jesus declared: “Whatever the Father does the Son also does” (John 5:19). And Jesus said: “Now my heart is troubled. ‘Father, save me from this hour?’ No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour. Father, glorify your name!” (John 12:27-28) The clear picture that emerges from Scripture is that Jesus was not the unfortunate victim of the angry Father. Rather, the Father and the Son were working in concert through the cross to pay for the sins of humanity and make atonement. There is no division of will between the Father and the Son.

The viewpoint which brings out the fact that Jesus’ atonement was done in love which provided covering and forgiveness of sins. And this view harmonizes with God’s wrath that is still yet to come and was not poured out on Jesus on the cross. Our loving God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezekiel 33:11).

It is by faith in the Son through the message of the gospel that saves and unbelief which condemns. The gospel is for all mankind, all the world, for everyone. God desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. (1 Timothy 2:4). God is the Savior of all men, especially of believers (1 Timothy. 4:10), For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to everyone (Titus 2:11) For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all (Romans 11:32). The Lord is not slow in keeping His promise as some understand slowness, but is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish but everyone to come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). God sent His Son into the world to take away the sin of the world (John 1:29) and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for sins of the whole world. (1 John 2:2). and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again (2 Corinthians 5:15). But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone. (Hebrews 2:9)

hope this helps !!!

 

[Johann]

Wrath from God is not required for the forgiveness of sins, that is a misnomer.

Around the globe, Christians gather together on Easter Sunday to celebrate Jesus’ resurrection from the dead. Despite the assertions made by skeptics, there is a considerable amount of evidence confirming the factuality of the empty tomb.



Indeed, the above was the topic of a recent podcast involving Professors Darrell Bock and Gary Habermas.[1] Together, they deliberated the relevant historical data affirming that Jesus of Nazareth not only died on the cross, but also bodily rose from the dead on the third day.



For instance, there are several early, distinctive literary sources that individually and collectively substantiate the historicity of the cross-resurrection event (e.g. each of the four Gospels, the book of Acts, and the writings of Paul). While these ancient sacred texts were written in various geographical locales, at different times, and to distinctive audiences, they remain in essential agreement concerning the episodes they recount.



During the podcast, the two professors noted that an entirely different, though related, issue concerns the theological significance of the cross-resurrection event. Admittedly, the Bock-Habermas exchange does not spend much time deliberating the reasons for Jesus’ atoning sacrifice. This is one major incentive for the present blogpost.



I’ll start off by noting that in his bestselling textbook, Christian Theology (2013; Zondervan; p. 215), Millard Erickson draws attention to the “manifold theories of the atonement” put forward by “theologians” down through the centuries. These include (among others), the Socinian theory, the moral-influence theory, the government theory, the ransom theory, and the satisfaction theory. As Erickson notes, none of these formulations is entirely complete and adequate in the explanation it offers.



Jeremy Treat, in The Crucified King (2014; Zondervan), advances the discussion by exploring the connection between Jesus’ atoning sacrifice at Calvary and the kingdom of God. Treat especially deliberates two prominent views, namely, Christus Victor and penal substitution. Based on his thoroughgoing analysis, he argues for “Christus Victor through penal substitution” (p. 192). I think his extensive analysis and reasoning are insightful.



Also worthy of mention is the useful illustration articulated by Mike Wittmer. In a blogpost titled, “What makes a full atonement full?”,[2] he proposes the “four arms of the cross” as a way to make sense of what Jesus did on behalf of the lost:



(1) “downward, toward Satan”–this Christus Victor“ aspect of the cross” was a reminder that the Son “died to defeat Satan,” the archenemy of believers who “held the power of sin and death”;



(2) “upward, toward God”–this “penal substitution” aspect of the cross was a reminder that the Son appeased the “Father’s wrath” and “satisfied” His eternal justice by “bearing” the “penalty” of humanity’s sin in their “place” and as their perfect substitute; and,



(3) “sideways,” toward the lost–this aspect of the cross provided a “moral influence” and “example” by demonstrating how much God unconditionally loved humankind.



In short, the divine “goal” was Christus Victor, the “means” was “penal substitution,” and one “benefit” (among many) was the Messiah’s “example” of “love” for all people.



Paul’s teaching in Romans 3:25–26 offers an incisive biblical expression of the preceding observations. The apostle revealed that the Father presented His Son as a sacrifice of atonement. The Greek noun for “sacrifice of atonement” (hilastḗrion) is rendered more literally as “propitiation.” This word communicates the idea that Jesus’ work on the cross averted God’s justifiable wrath against sinners.



Jesus’ sacrificial death also provided “expiation,” or the removal of personal guilt. Paul was making a parallel between the atoning sacrifices offered in the Jerusalem temple and Jesus’ offering of Himself on the cross.



Paul revealed that Jesus’ redemptive work is appropriated “through faith in his blood.” Indeed, it is only as a result of trusting in the Son that repentant sinners receive the benefits of Jesus’ atoning death at Calvary. In this regard, salvation is not something that can be earned, but only welcomed by God’s grace with humility and gratitude (see Eph 2:5, 8–9).



As the Reformed tradition notes, when a person becomes a Christian, a “marvelous exchange” occurs. The believer’s sinfulness is transferred to Jesus on the cross and His perfect righteousness is transferred to the believer.



The good news is that through this divinely-initiated and enacted transaction, the requirements of the Mosaic Law are met in full. Just as remarkable is the truth that Jesus’ righteousness in the believer enables that person to live consistently according to the Spirit (see Rom 8:4).



To conclude, Paul’s exhortation in Galatians 5:25 serves as an appropriate prayer, especially as Christians throughout the globe celebrate this Easter Sunday, Jesus’ resurrection from the dead: “Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit.”

________________________________________________________________________



[1] Bock DL and Habermas 2018. Evidence for Jesus’ empty tomb. The table podcast. Dallas: Dallas Theological Seminary. Weblink: https://voice.dts.edu/tablepodcast/empty-tomb/.

 

[civic]

Expiation- the covering for our sins

Through expiation—the work of Christ on the cross for us—the sin of all those who would ever believe in Christ was canceled. That cancellation is eternal in its consequence, even though sin is still present in the temporal sense. In other words, believers are delivered from the penalty and power of sin, but not the presence of it. Justification is the term for being delivered from the penalty of sin. This is a one-time act wherein the sinner is justified and made holy and righteous in the eyes of God, who exchanged our sinful natures for the righteousness of Christ at the cross (2 Corinthians 5:21). Sanctification is the ongoing process whereby believers are delivered from the power of sin in their lives and are enabled by the new nature to resist and turn away from it. Glorification is when we are removed from the very presence of sin, which will only occur once we leave this world and are in heaven. All these processes—justification, sanctification, and glorification—are made possible through the expiation or cancellation of sin. (gotquestions.org)

Propitiation vs. Expiation- The New Testament usage of hilaskomai and hilasmos, consistent with its precedent usage in the Greek Old Testament, speaks consistently of God’s atoning action in Christ directed toward sin on behalf of sinners, not human action directed toward God to satisfy God. The criterion for interpretation, Stott has said, “is whether the object of the atoning action is God or man.” “Propitiation” indicates an action by humans directed toward God, and “expiation” indicates an action by God toward sin and sinners. According to Stott's criterion, these texts favor "expiation" over “propitiation.” Given the choice of translating hilastērion either “propitiation” or “expiation,” therefore, “expiation” is preferable based on the textual evidence of both the New Testament and the Greek Old Testament. James Dunn summarizes well the case for preferring “expiation” to “propitiation” as a translation for hilastērion: Darrin W. Snyder Belousek, Atonement, Justice, and Peace: The Message of the Cross and the Mission of the Church (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2012), 247–252.

Here is the only other use from 1 John 4:10 that the NASB translated as propitiation.

Below love is used 13 times which is the overwhelming evidence it means atoning sacrifice, expiation and not propitiation which would be a direct contradiction to the context of the passage. Johns’ emphasis is on God’s love used 13 times in the passage. Context determines the meaning of a word and its clear from the context hilasmos means expiation and not propitiation.

1 John 4:7-12
7 Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. 9 This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. 10 This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. 11 Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. 12 No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us. NIV

Now here is the interesting thing it is used in the context of God’s love, not Gods anger/wrath that needs appeasing. There are better translations of the Greek word below. The "context" makes it clear in 1 John 4 that its Gods love and not His anger/wrath that needs appeasing which is the emphasis in 1 John 4:10.

New International Version
This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.

New American Bible
In this is love: not that we have loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as expiation for our sins.

NET Bible
In this is love: not that we have loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins.

New Revised Standard Version
In this is love, not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins.

So, as we see, the Tri-Unity of God is eternal, and the Father / Son relationship remained perfect through the crucifixion of Jesus. Our Triune God perfectly accomplished the atonement and our salvation through Jesus suffering for our sins on the cross, and His Resurrection from the dead gave Him and the church victory over sin, death, the devil, and the world.

hope this helps !!!

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

NKJV
10 In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

KJV
10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

NASB
10 In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

21KJV
10 Herein is love: not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

Young's Literal
10 in this is the love, not that we loved God, but that He did love us, and did send His Son a propitiation for our sins.

NMB
10 Herein is love – not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

Tomato, tomato.

 

[civic]

NKJV
10 In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

KJV
10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

NASB
10 In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

21KJV
10 Herein is love: not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

Young's Literal
10 in this is the love, not that we loved God, but that He did love us, and did send His Son a propitiation for our sins.

NMB
10 Herein is love – not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

Tomato, tomato.

if it means appease wrath or an angry god in that passage its double speak and an oxymoron. A HORRIBLE translation of the word in that passage.

Herein is love – not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to ( appease gods wrath/anger, to sooth the an angry god ) for our sins.

The opposite of love.


hope this helps !!!

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

if it means appease wrath or an angry god in that passage its double speak and an oxymoron. A HORRIBLE translation of the word in that passage.

Herein is love – not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to ( appease Gods wrath/anger, to sooth the anger of god ) for our sins.

The opposite of love.


hope this helps !!!

No, it doesn't help. It just shows how you will re-interpret all scripture by applying "God is love" to it instead of taking the text for what it says.

 

[civic]

No, it doesn't help. It just shows how you will re-interpret all scripture by applying "God is love" to it instead of taking the text for what it says.

nope it says God is love in the passage, not wrath.

hope this helps !!!

 

[Dizerner]

nope it says God is love in the passage, not wrath.

hope this helps !!!

Does love ever get angry?

 

[civic]

Does love ever get angry?

Not on His Redeemed and His Redeemer. His love covers a multitude of sins

 

[Dizerner]

Not on His Redeemed and His Redeemer. His love covers a multitude of sins

But then sin is never punished or paid for.

You are skipping the "cost" part, Jesus SUFFERED for sins.

Yes, to answer the question Biblically, love does get angry.

And suffering is how love covers.

 

[atpollard]

But then sin is never punished or paid for.

Who receives the payment?

The wages of sin is death … so that payment every man (with the possible exception of Enoch and Elijah ) made for themselves. It is the relationship that needs restoration. It is the curse of Adam that needs purging. It is a new birth that we require.

God NEEDS nothing. God certainly needs NOTHING from us. So what could Jesus “pay” that God would need?

 

[Dizerner]

Who receives the payment?

Sin is a moral debt to God.

Not to the devil.

Not to your momma.

Sin is a moral debt to God, and Christ described sin as a debt that will turn us over to torturers.

The wages of sin is death … so that payment every man (with the possible exception of Enoch and Elijah ) made for themselves. It is the relationship that needs restoration. It is the curse of Adam that needs purging. It is a new birth that we require.

If death alone were the payment, when we die we paid off our debt and thereafter deserve heaven, because it's paid.

God NEEDS nothing. God certainly needs NOTHING from us. So what could Jesus “pay” that God would need?

God wanting something, God deserving something, is never God needing something.

God has every right to punish sin.

And he will.

What Jesus pays is the moral debt we owe to God for being evil and doing wicked things against God.

 

[atpollard]

What Jesus pays is the moral debt we owe to God for being evil and doing wicked things against God.

That is not the “word picture” that Jesus or the Apostles used. Jesus chose to RESCUE us, to RANSOM us, to REDEEM us from slavery to another. God chose a word-picture of LOVE and “adoption” rather than a word-picture of WRATH and punishment averted to describe His children.

[John 3:18 NASB] "The one who believes in Him is not judged; the one who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.”

Notice that our punishment is not “set aside”, we are not “paroled” or even “pardoned” … we are “NOT JUDGED”.
Notice that those who reject Him stand “JUDGED ALREADY” … it is they who will face His WRATH “on the Day of Wrath”.

This is a pattern that Scripture repeats over and over. It is a pattern contrary to God the Father pouring our wrath upon God the Son. It is a binary “not judged/loved” vs “already judged/stored wrath”.

”Christus Victor” … Jesus died to accomplish exactly what scripture states that He accomplished: no more and no less.

 

[Johann]

Expiation- the covering for our sins

Rejection of propitiation is not something new. Even some Bible translators have avoided using the term. The Revised Standard Version, for example, uses the word expiation instead of propitiation in Romans 3:25; Hebrews 2:17; and 1 John 2:2; 4:10. The difference is enormously significant.

Expiation, though important, is impersonal: Sin is expiated, not a person.2 Sin is covered or sent away. One standard Bible dictionary defines expiation as “atonement, purification, or removal of sin or its guilt.”3 Sin was certainly expiated when Jesus died on the cross, but propitiation also took place.

Propitiation is highly personal. God is propitiated. His wrath was satisfied by Christ’s death—the means by which sin is expiated. We must not confuse the concepts, nor accept one without the other. Both are vital aspects of the atonement. And we must not reject propitiation as the satisfaction of God’s wrath; Christ acted as our substitute, taking upon Himself the punishment for our sins.

It is impossible to overlook the many Bible references to God’s wrath.
It is impossible to overlook the many Bible references to God’s wrath. In the Old Testament, the entire sacrificial system implies Israel had to deal with it. The nation needed to offer animal sacrifices to God to receive temporary forgiveness for sins. The sacrifices pointed toward the final sacrifice for sin—the Messiah—as described by the prophet Isaiah in Isaiah 53.

Isaiah 53 clarifies the relationship between God’s wrath and our sin. The Messiah, or “Suffering Servant,” is not only “despised and rejected by men” (v. 3) but also “smitten by God” (v. 4). Verse 5 describes the work of God: “He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed.”

God made Christ an offering for sin (v. 10). Words like wounded, bruised, and chastisement point to God’s punishment poured on the Messiah. His death propitiated God’s wrath, just as the Mosaic sacrifices temporarily satisfied God’s anger before Christ’s final sacrifice. Thus Isaiah 53 provides the best picture of the notion of propitiation.

The New Testament also speaks of God’s wrath. In John 3:14–15, Jesus compared His future death on the cross to the bronze serpent Moses lifted up in the wilderness: “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.” Jesus was referring to the incident in Numbers 21 when God sent snakes into the Israelite camp to bite the people because of their sin. God instructed Moses to set a bronze snake on a pole so all those who looked at it by faith would be healed from their bites and live (vv. 4–9).

In the same way, all those who look to God’s Son will live and receive forgiveness of sins. The cross of Christ turns away God’s wrath, just as looking to the serpent turned it away. To interpret the passage differently makes no sense of Jesus’ analogy. John 3:36 states plainly the “wrath of God abides on” those who do not believe in the Son. They do not obtain the cure for sin, the penal substitutionary death of Christ. His sacrifice satisfies God’s anger.

Some New Testament passages specifically use the word propitiation relative to Christ’s death for our sins. In Romans 3:25, the Greek word for propitiation (hilaste¯rion) appears in one of the Bible’s most comprehensive sections on the various aspects of Jesus’ work on the cross—such as righteousness, sin, faith, justification, redemption, propitiation, and Christ’s blood (vv. 21–26).4 The apostle Paul said, “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood” (vv. 23–25). The passage clearly states propitiation is a work of God through the blood of Christ. The Father made His Son a propitiation to satisfy His wrath and save sinners who trust in Christ. That truth is the most powerful message in the Word of God.

First John also contains passages that mention propitiation. First John 2:2 says, “And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.” While many discussions about this passage focus on the extent of the atonement, we must also recognize the importance of the word propitiation. The idea of the satisfaction of God’s wrath is consistent with the context. In the previous verse, the apostle John described Jesus as the Advocate who defends believers before the Father. He also described Him as “righteous,” which makes Him qualified to be our propitiation, the satisfaction of God’s wrath.

First John 4:10 also recognizes the Son of God as the “propitiation for our sins.” The verse’s context indicates that the depth of God’s love found in Christ’s death on the cross and in His propitiation of God’s wrath should motivate Christians to love one another.

In addition, both Luke 18:9–14 and Hebrews 2:17 teach about God’s work in providing propitiation through Christ.

In Luke 18:9–14, a Pharisee and a tax collector were praying—the former in his pride, the latter in his humility. The tax collector prayed, “God, be merciful to me a sinner!” (v. 13). His statement could also be translated, “God, be propitious to me a sinner” or “God, count Your wrath upon my sin to be satisfied.”



HEBREWS
Dive deeper into the doctrine of propitiation in this commentary of Hebrews by David Levy.

Hebrews 2:17 states, “Therefore, in all things He had to be made like His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.” This verse emphasizes the necessity of Christ becoming the incarnate God-Man so Jesus could make a human sacrifice. If He were not 100 percent God and 100 percent man, His sacrifice could not properly satisfy God’s wrath on human sin.

Through Scripture, the Bible clearly teaches the reality of God’s wrath and His intention to turn it away through Jesus. The divine plan sent Christ to the cross to die as a punitive substitute for our sin so God’s wrath would be satisfied. This is the concept of propitiation. It is required because God is just and holy. He must condemn and judge sin. But His provision of Jesus to make propitiation for sinners demonstrates the great love He has for all of us (Jn. 3:16; Rom. 5:8).

ENDNOTEs
J. Denny Weaver, The Nonviolent Atonement, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2011), 5.
Leon Morris, The Atonement: Its Meaning and Significance (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1983), 151–52.
Walter A. Elwell and Philip Wesley Comfort, Tyndale Bible Dictionary (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 2001), 460, sv. “expiation.”
Thomas R. Schreiner, Paul: Apostle of God’s Glory in Christ (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2001), 234–36.

 

[civic]

Nowhere does scripture teach God needs to be appeased. That is paganGreek and gnostic philosophy appeasing the angry gods. It’s heathenism. It’s what we see in the OT with Molech worshippers sacrificing children to their angry god to sooth his anger, to appease him- propitiate him.

Expiation is the biblical answer and propitiation is the unbiblical answer and horrible translation which came out of the dark ages and reformation period.

hope this helps !!!

 

[atpollard]

Isaiah 53 clarifies the relationship between God’s wrath and our sin. The Messiah, or “Suffering Servant,” is not only “despised and rejected by men” (v. 3) but also “smitten by God” (v. 4).

You are usually very careful. What EXACTLY does that verse say? The WHOLE verse.
Does GOD say that He smote Him?
Does it say something else?

Isaiah 53:4
KJV
Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

NKJV
Surely He has borne our griefs
And carried our sorrows;
Yet we esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten by God, and afflicted.

NLT
Yet it was our weaknesses he carried;
it was our sorrows[fn] that weighed him down.
And we thought his troubles were a punishment from God,
a punishment for his own sins!

NIV
Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted.

ESV
Surely he has borne our griefs
and carried our sorrows;
yet we esteemed him stricken,
smitten by God, and afflicted.

CSB
Yet he himself bore our sicknesses,
and he carried our pains;
but we in turn regarded him stricken,
struck down by God, and afflicted.

NASB20
However, it was our sicknesses that He Himself bore,
And our pains that He carried;
Yet we ourselves assumed that He had been afflicted,
Struck down by God, and humiliated.

Those standing at the crucifixion and watching and mocking, did they not “esteem Him stricken, smitten by God and afflicted” just as Isaiah prophesied they (“we” = Jews) would.
Yet the TRUTH was:

• [John 10:18 NKJV] "No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father."
• [Act 2:23, 36 NKJV] 23 "Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; ... 36 "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ."
• [Act 4:10 NKJV] 10 "let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole.

 

[civic]

Though often taught from the pulpit and widely accepted within Christianity, there is a common misnomer that God cannot look upon sin.

This misnomer or idea is rooted in a misunderstanding of Habakkuk 1:13, which states, "Your eyes are too pure to look upon evil." To expand upon the meaning of this verse, God cannot look at sin favorably or with complacency. However, this verse does not state that God cannot look at sin or that He cannot allow sin in His presence. God did not turn His back on Adam when he sinned--God sought him out. God did not turn His back on David when he sinned. Jesus sought out Peter after he denied Him 3 times. Judas whom Jesus said one of you is the devil was on of His 12 disciples. In the book of Job, God allowed satan in His presence for a specific purpose. Satan wanted to make a deal with God over His servant, Job. God restricted Satan, telling him that he "can do anything but touch Job" and not to "lay a hand or finger on him." In the wilderness, Jesus allowed the presence of satan (face to face).

Jesus did not turn His back on Saul when he was persecuting the church and sought him out on the Damascus Road and said to him," why are you persecuting Me?" If God did not turn His back on sinners, then neither did the Father turn His back on His only Son who is Holy, Blameless, Sinless, and Righteous just like His Father. The Father turning His back on the Son (at the cross) is not found in Scripture. Jesus ate with sinners, lived among sinners, loves sinners and He suffered and died for sinners.

Wrath- strongs 3709 ὀργή is defined in the Greek lexicon as anger, retribution, vengeance, and indignation. God is not against Himself angrily displaying wrath from the Father to the Son. God is love. In love, He sent His Son. The wrath bearing Son is a new concept not found in Scripture nor the early church fathers (ECFs). God is not against Himself. No one in the Trinity is in opposition, no conflict, no dissension, no strife, no disunity, no dysfunction. As if God were somehow like a sinful human family. There is nothing broken in Our Blessed Trinity.

Jesus bearing God’s wrath and being despised and forsaken by the Father and Him turning His back on the Son is not found in the pages of Scripture. That doctrine was developed in the dark ages during the Reformation and called Penal Substitution Theory of the Atonement or (PSA)

conclusion: PSA starts from a false premise regarding sin and wrath.

hope this helps !!!

 

[civic]

You are usually very careful. What EXACTLY does that verse say? The WHOLE verse.
Does GOD say that He smote Him?
Does it say something else?

Isaiah 53:4
KJV
Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

NKJV
Surely He has borne our griefs
And carried our sorrows;
Yet we esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten by God, and afflicted.

NLT
Yet it was our weaknesses he carried;
it was our sorrows[fn] that weighed him down.
And we thought his troubles were a punishment from God,
a punishment for his own sins!

NIV
Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted.

ESV
Surely he has borne our griefs
and carried our sorrows;
yet we esteemed him stricken,
smitten by God, and afflicted.

CSB
Yet he himself bore our sicknesses,
and he carried our pains;
but we in turn regarded him stricken,
struck down by God, and afflicted.

NASB20
However, it was our sicknesses that He Himself bore,
And our pains that He carried;
Yet we ourselves assumed that He had been afflicted,
Struck down by God, and humiliated.

Those standing at the crucifixion and watching and mocking, did they not “esteem Him stricken, smitten by God and afflicted” just as Isaiah prophesied they (“we” = Jews) would.
Yet the TRUTH was:

• [John 10:18 NKJV] "No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father."
• [Act 2:23, 36 NKJV] 23 "Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; ... 36 "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ."
• [Act 4:10 NKJV] 10 "let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole.

Correct WE, not God.

 

[civic]

I'll check back in a few house after our mens discipleship group is over at my house.

Great topic for discussion.

 

[Johann]

You are usually very careful. What EXACTLY does that verse say? The WHOLE verse.

Correct-I am very careful and don't want to offend the anti-PSA opponents.

Isa 53:4 SurelyH403 Adv ’ā·ḵên אָכֵ֤ן our griefs,H2483 N-mpc+1cp ḥo·lā·yê·nū חֳלָיֵ֙נוּ֙ HeH1931 Pro-3ms hū ה֣וּא has borneH5375 H8804 V-Qal-Perf-3ms nā·śā נָשָׂ֔א and our sorrows;H4341 Conj-w+N-mpc+1cp ū·maḵ·’ō·ḇê·nū וּמַכְאֹבֵ֖ינוּ N1 carriedH5445 H8804 V-Qal-Perf-3ms+3mp sə·ḇā·lām סְבָלָ֑ם and yet weH587 Conj-w+Pro-1cp wa·’ă·naḥ·nū וַאֲנַ֣חְנוּ esteemed HimH2803 H8804 V-Qal-Perf-1cp+3ms ḥă·šaḇ·nu·hū חֲשַׁבְנֻ֔הוּ stricken,H5060 H8803 V-Qal-QalPassPrtcpl-ms nā·ḡū·a‘ נָג֛וּעַ Smitten byH5221 H8716 V-Hofal-Prtcpl-msc muk·kêh מֻכֵּ֥ה God,H430 N-mp ’ĕ·lō·hîm אֱלֹהִ֖ים and afflicted.H6031 H8794 Conj-w+V-Pual-Prtcpl-ms ū·mə·‘un·neh וּמְעֻנֶּֽה׃

Isa 53:4 He bears our sins, and is pained for us: yet we accounted him to be in trouble, and in suffering, and in affliction.

Isa 53:5 But he was pierced [Yeshayah 51:9; Zecharyah 12:10 Sukkah 52a, Tehillim 22:17 Targum Hashivim] for our transgressions, he was bruised mei'avonoteinu (for our iniquities); the musar (chastisement) (that brought us shalom [Yeshayah 54:10] was upon him [Moshiach]; and at the cost of his (Moshiach's) chaburah (stripes, lacerations) we are healed.

RASHI-
And the Lord wished to crush him, He made him ill; if his soul makes itself restitution, he shall see children, he shall prolong his days, and God's purpose shall prosper in his hand. יוַֽיהֹוָ֞ה חָפֵ֚ץ דַּכְּאוֹ֙ הֶֽחֱלִ֔י אִם־תָּשִׂ֚ים אָשָׁם֙ נַפְשׁ֔וֹ יִרְאֶ֥ה זֶ֖רַע יַֽאֲרִ֣יךְ יָמִ֑ים וְחֵ֥פֶץ יְהֹוָ֖ה בְּיָד֥וֹ יִצְלָֽח:

And the Lord wished to crush him, He made him ill: The Holy One, blessed be He, wished to crush him and to cause him to repent; therefore, he made him ill.

וה' חפץ דכאו החלי: הקב"ה חפץ לדכאו ולהחזירו למוטב לפיכך החלה אותו:

If his soul makes itself restitution, etc.: Said the Holy One, blessed be He, “I will see, if his soul will be given and delivered with My holiness to return it to Me as restitution for all that he betrayed Me, I will pay him his recompense, and he will see children, etc.” This word אָשָׁם is an expression of ransom that one gives to the one against when he sinned, amende in O.F., to free from faults, similar to the matter mentioned in the episode of the Philistines (I Sam. 6:3), “Do not send it away empty, but you shall send back with it a guilt offering (אָשָׁם).”

אם תשים אשם נפשו וגו': אמר הקב"ה אראה אם תהא נפשו נותנת ונמסרת בקדושתי להשיבה לי אשם על כל אשר מעל אגמל לו גמולו ויראה זרע וגו' אשם זה לשון כופר שנותן אדם למי שחטא לו אמינד"א בלע"ז כענין שנא' בפלשתים אל תשיבו אותו ריקם כי השב תשיבו לו אשם:

--So I will opt out of this discussion if that is alright with you.