The 10 most Commonly referred to points against PSA

“Penal Substitutionary Atonement” (PSA) is a theological term that describes how Jesus took the sins of mankind upon Himself when He died on the cross. God is holy and demands that sin be punished, but He chose to punish Jesus in place of guilty sinners (like you and me). His death appeased the wrath of God against sinners and it also satisfied the need for justice to occur.

is a theological term that describes how Jesus took the sins of mankind upon Himself when He died on the cross. God is holy and demands that sin be punished, but He chose to punish Jesus in place of guilty sinners (like you and me). His death appeased the wrath of God against sinners and it also satisfied the need for justice to occur.

Now show me in the N.T. where Jesus was PUNISHED by God ?

That would be penal so where is it ?

Where did Jesus say He was punished by God ( penal ) ?

Where did the Apostles ?

Please do you own homework and find a single passage to substantiate your claim.

I await a BIBLICAL response admitting you cannot find a single verse.

At best its an emotional argument based upon a wrong belief in the atonement taught by the Atoner Himself - Jesus.

1-The word punish is used one time in the NT. (Acts 4:21)
2-The word punished is used four times in the NT. (Acts 22:5, Acts 26:11, 2Th 1:9, 2Pe 2:9)
3-The word punishment is used four times in the NT. (Matt 25:46, 2Cor 2:6, Heb 10:29, 1 Pe 2:14)
4-The word wrath is used 38 times in the NT

Not one time are any of these words used towards our Lord by God.

conclusion: Scripture sides 100 % with my POV. At best the oppositions argument is an argument from silence fallacy.

hope this helps !!!
When we get to the NT, the meaning of the Cross of Christ is presented in many, many different ways. Dilling ["The Atonement and Human Sacrifice", Grace Theological Journal, 1998] gives a quick sketch of some of the major themes:

(1) Sacrificial: For our passover also hath been sacrificed, even Christ (1 Cor 5:7).

(2) Expiatory: For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling them that have been defiled, sanctify unto the cleanness of the flesh: how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish unto God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? (Heb 9:13-14).

(3) Propitiatory: Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins (1 John 4:10).

(4) Redemptive: Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us; for it is written, Cursed is everyone that hangeth on a tree (Gal 3:13).

(5) Representative: For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that one died for all, therefore all died; and he died for all, that they that live should no longer live unto themselves, but unto him who for their sakes died and rose again (2 Cor 5:14-15).

(6) Exemplary: For hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that ye should follow his steps (1 Pet 2:21).

(7) Triumphantorial: You, I say, did he make alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses; having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and he hath taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross; having despoiled the principalities and the powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it (Col 2:15).

(8) Substitutionary: But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed (Isa 53:5-6).

To this list we might add

(9) Reconciliation: "For if while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son..." (Rom 5.10)

(10) Priestly/Intercessory: "Hence, also, He is able to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them. Such a high priest meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself...but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption...For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’ presence...Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people..." (Heb 7.25,26; 9.11, 24, 28)

(11) New Covenant Inaugurator (and actually, Old Covenant 'salvager'?): "For if the blood of goats and bulls, with the sprinkling of the ashes of a heifer, sanctifies those who have been defiled so that their flesh is purified, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to worship the living God! For this reason he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, because a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions under the first covenant." (Heb 9.13ff)

...........................................................
Excursus for the Forgiven...

Now, before we get to the more technical discussion of legal "transfer" of guilt, punishment, standing, or whatever, I want us--speaking only to the Christians here (the rest of you can/should probably skip this Excursus and move down to the rest of the article)-- to be very clear on one fact:

Every one of the Atonement Representations above involve either the element of 'substitution' and/or 'sacrifice' (but the 'penal' concept is not pervasive throughout, of course). There is no option here--fidelity to the message of the New Testament (and much of the OT/Tanaach, obviously) requires that this element of substitution/sacrifice be taken very, very seriously.

Some Christians may not like that obviously core element of how we are reclaimed to life, but the construction of an alternative explanation for this core is a difficult, dangerous, and doubtful enterprise.

[This in NO WAY--let me hasten to add--answers our question here!!!! This article is trying to explore the why/how, not simply 'resting on' the what/that. For the purposes of our discussion HERE, the fact that Jesus, Isaiah, Paul--and GOD the Father taught it as truth, beauty, the marvelous means of free grace, and used it to reclaim our lost lives is ("epistemically") inconsequential. My remarks to the Christian here is simply to make the point clear that there is 'no exit' here--the whole 'system' rises/falls with the reality of the work of Jesus on the Cross--as presented in the only real data we have about the 'other side', our Bible.]

Let me say this another way, because it is important for Christians (obviously not the only readers of this article, of course) to understand the implications of any rejection of substitution/sacrifice, under allegations of illegality, immorality, unintelligibility, antiquarian, accommodationist, or simple ignorance by the NT authors/Jesus:

(1) To reject this as being the central "mechanism" of the work of Christ on the Cross requires one to construct an alternative explanation as to how all the problems addressed by the various 'representations' above are solved thereby--and be able to defend that biblically and theologically without the same level or greater difficulties than those incurred in the above 'traditional' views [I consider this to be nigh-on impossible, given what I know about theology at this point in my life, btw]. For example, consider just these representations by significant theologians/expositors, dealing, in this case, (primarily) with issues of God's justice/wrath and reconciliation:

"The danger of overemphasizing God's wrath does exist.
But it hardly justifies the impossible programme of trying to expunge the attribute from the NT record. God's coming wrath is a persistent theme of Jesus' parables. In non-parabolic discourse Jesus spoke repeatedly of 'the fire of hell' (Matt. 5:22) and 'eternal fire' (Matt. 18:8). He urged his followers, 'Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell' (Luke 12:5). The double-edged nature of Jesus' ministry is well summarized in John 3:36: 'Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him.' Those who reject God's righteousness become targets of his wrath (Rom. 1:18, 24, 26, 28; Eph. 5:6; Col. 3:6; Heb. 10:26-31; Rev. 19:11-21). God's wrath is not a minor or isolated biblical theme....Atonement takes on its importance, urgency, and poignancy precisely because God's righteous judgment is coming upon humans and their unrighteous ways. Jesus' death not only expiates sin (wipes away its penalty); it also propitiates (turns away the wrath of) God's promised punishment of sin and sinners whose transgressions are not atoned for... Propitiation is not a peripheral but a vitally important implication of their references to atonement and its absolute necessity." [Alexander, T. D., & Rosner, B. S. (2001). New Dictionary of Biblical Theology (electronic ed.). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press., s.v. "Atonement"]
Isa 53:4 Surely he hath borne our sufferings, and nasah (carried [Vayikra 16:22; Yeshayah 53:12)] our sorrows; yet we did esteem him stricken, [i.e., like a leper is stricken] smitten of G-d, and afflicted [see verse 8 below].
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.

Isa 53:10 Yet it pleased Hashem to bruise him; He hath put him to suffering; when Thou shalt make his nefesh an asham offering for sin, he (Moshiach) shall see zera [see Psalm 16 and Yn 1:12 OJBC], He shall prolong his yamim (days) and the chefetz Hashem (pleasure, will of Hashem) shall prosper in his [Moshiach's] hand.

Your question answered-and no amount of tap dancing around it is going to help you.
 
"Penal"
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the KJV.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the NKJV.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the NLT.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the NIV.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the ESV.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the CSB.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the NASB20.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the LSB.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the NET.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the RSV.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the ASV.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the YLT.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the DBY.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the WEB.

[sorry, I couldn't resist.] :)
No problem-scrap the Trinity, it is not in Scripture.
 
When we get to the NT, the meaning of the Cross of Christ is presented in many, many different ways. Dilling ["The Atonement and Human Sacrifice", Grace Theological Journal, 1998] gives a quick sketch of some of the major themes:

(1) Sacrificial: For our passover also hath been sacrificed, even Christ (1 Cor 5:7).

(2) Expiatory: For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling them that have been defiled, sanctify unto the cleanness of the flesh: how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish unto God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? (Heb 9:13-14).

(3) Propitiatory: Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins (1 John 4:10).

(4) Redemptive: Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us; for it is written, Cursed is everyone that hangeth on a tree (Gal 3:13).

(5) Representative: For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that one died for all, therefore all died; and he died for all, that they that live should no longer live unto themselves, but unto him who for their sakes died and rose again (2 Cor 5:14-15).

(6) Exemplary: For hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that ye should follow his steps (1 Pet 2:21).

(7) Triumphantorial: You, I say, did he make alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses; having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and he hath taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross; having despoiled the principalities and the powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it (Col 2:15).

(8) Substitutionary: But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed (Isa 53:5-6).

To this list we might add

(9) Reconciliation: "For if while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son..." (Rom 5.10)

(10) Priestly/Intercessory: "Hence, also, He is able to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them. Such a high priest meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself...but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption...For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’ presence...Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people..." (Heb 7.25,26; 9.11, 24, 28)

(11) New Covenant Inaugurator (and actually, Old Covenant 'salvager'?): "For if the blood of goats and bulls, with the sprinkling of the ashes of a heifer, sanctifies those who have been defiled so that their flesh is purified, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to worship the living God! For this reason he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, because a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions under the first covenant." (Heb 9.13ff)

...........................................................
Excursus for the Forgiven...

Now, before we get to the more technical discussion of legal "transfer" of guilt, punishment, standing, or whatever, I want us--speaking only to the Christians here (the rest of you can/should probably skip this Excursus and move down to the rest of the article)-- to be very clear on one fact:

Every one of the Atonement Representations above involve either the element of 'substitution' and/or 'sacrifice' (but the 'penal' concept is not pervasive throughout, of course). There is no option here--fidelity to the message of the New Testament (and much of the OT/Tanaach, obviously) requires that this element of substitution/sacrifice be taken very, very seriously.

Some Christians may not like that obviously core element of how we are reclaimed to life, but the construction of an alternative explanation for this core is a difficult, dangerous, and doubtful enterprise.

[This in NO WAY--let me hasten to add--answers our question here!!!! This article is trying to explore the why/how, not simply 'resting on' the what/that. For the purposes of our discussion HERE, the fact that Jesus, Isaiah, Paul--and GOD the Father taught it as truth, beauty, the marvelous means of free grace, and used it to reclaim our lost lives is ("epistemically") inconsequential. My remarks to the Christian here is simply to make the point clear that there is 'no exit' here--the whole 'system' rises/falls with the reality of the work of Jesus on the Cross--as presented in the only real data we have about the 'other side', our Bible.]

Let me say this another way, because it is important for Christians (obviously not the only readers of this article, of course) to understand the implications of any rejection of substitution/sacrifice, under allegations of illegality, immorality, unintelligibility, antiquarian, accommodationist, or simple ignorance by the NT authors/Jesus:

(1) To reject this as being the central "mechanism" of the work of Christ on the Cross requires one to construct an alternative explanation as to how all the problems addressed by the various 'representations' above are solved thereby--and be able to defend that biblically and theologically without the same level or greater difficulties than those incurred in the above 'traditional' views [I consider this to be nigh-on impossible, given what I know about theology at this point in my life, btw]. For example, consider just these representations by significant theologians/expositors, dealing, in this case, (primarily) with issues of God's justice/wrath and reconciliation:

"The danger of overemphasizing God's wrath does exist.
But it hardly justifies the impossible programme of trying to expunge the attribute from the NT record. God's coming wrath is a persistent theme of Jesus' parables. In non-parabolic discourse Jesus spoke repeatedly of 'the fire of hell' (Matt. 5:22) and 'eternal fire' (Matt. 18:8). He urged his followers, 'Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell' (Luke 12:5). The double-edged nature of Jesus' ministry is well summarized in John 3:36: 'Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him.' Those who reject God's righteousness become targets of his wrath (Rom. 1:18, 24, 26, 28; Eph. 5:6; Col. 3:6; Heb. 10:26-31; Rev. 19:11-21). God's wrath is not a minor or isolated biblical theme....Atonement takes on its importance, urgency, and poignancy precisely because God's righteous judgment is coming upon humans and their unrighteous ways. Jesus' death not only expiates sin (wipes away its penalty); it also propitiates (turns away the wrath of) God's promised punishment of sin and sinners whose transgressions are not atoned for... Propitiation is not a peripheral but a vitally important implication of their references to atonement and its absolute necessity." [Alexander, T. D., & Rosner, B. S. (2001). New Dictionary of Biblical Theology (electronic ed.). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press., s.v. "Atonement"]
Isa 53:4 Surely he hath borne our sufferings, and nasah (carried [Vayikra 16:22; Yeshayah 53:12)] our sorrows; yet we did esteem him stricken, [i.e., like a leper is stricken] smitten of G-d, and afflicted [see verse 8 below].
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.

Isa 53:10 Yet it pleased Hashem to bruise him; He hath put him to suffering; when Thou shalt make his nefesh an asham offering for sin, he (Moshiach) shall see zera [see Psalm 16 and Yn 1:12 OJBC], He shall prolong his yamim (days) and the chefetz Hashem (pleasure, will of Hashem) shall prosper in his [Moshiach's] hand.

Your question answered-and no amount of tap dancing around it is going to help you.
Can you define propitiation from a lexicon ?

Once you do you will realize the Greek New Testament does not teach propitiation. It teaches expiation.

Jesus taught expiation and since He is God and the One who atoned for sin He should know what the Atonement means more than anyone.

hope this helps !!!
 
No problem-scrap the Trinity, it is not in Scripture.
strawman.

The plural God is in Scripture and stated many times that the Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God. Unless you are a Unitarian or Modalist you know what I just stated is true and exposes your fallacious argument.

These are the types of statements made when one cannot back up their arguments with scripture by arguing a strawman. Its a diversion tactic as well to go off topic with the discussion.

hope this helps !!!
 
Can you define propitiation from a lexicon ?

Once you do you will realize the Greek New Testament does not teach propitiation. It teaches expiation.

Jesus taught expiation and since He is God and the One who atoned for sin He should know what the Atonement means more than anyone.

hope this helps !!!
You cannot "divorce" propitiation from expiation-you of all people should know this.
 
You cannot "divorce" propitiation from expiation-you of all people should know this.
of course you can they are not the same.

Propitiation- the turning away of God's anger/wrath- to appease an angry god.

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.

hope this helps !!!
 
strawman.

The plural God is in Scripture and stated many times that the Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God. Unless you are a Unitarian or Modalist you know what I just stated is true and exposes your fallacious argument.

These are the types of statements made when one cannot back up their arguments with scripture by arguing a strawman. Its a diversion tactic as well to go off topic with the discussion.

hope this helps !!!
Show me ONE verse in Apples 33,2 that says-"Trinity"
Your question is already answered brother-looks to me you are plucking at strawmen.
 
Show me ONE verse in Apples 33,2 that says-"Trinity"
Your question is already answered brother-looks to me you are plucking at strawmen.
projecting again.

Are you a Trinitarian ? yes or no

If you are you just admitted, you cannot defend the Trinity.

I rest my case.
 
The fact is the word does not need to be in Scripture but the meaning of the word/concept is in Scripture. So the Trinity can be proven by its concept and meaning.

Appeasing an angry god in the atonement cannot hence propitiation is wrong. Expiation is the correct meaning in the Atonement.

I just proved both of my points are true doctrinally in scripture and exposed the find the word fallacy in the bible.

hope this helps !!!
 
Just to save me time--

Hebrews 7 illustrates that Jesus fulfilled the Law of Moses and is superior to that Law. Because Jesus is greater, it only makes sense that we should follow Him. One of the ways that Jesus is greater is in that Jesus’ sacrifice was once for all (Hebrews 7:27).

The Law of Moses prescribed that there would be priests who would make regular, repeated sacrifices on behalf of the people and on behalf of themselves (e.g., Exodus 30:10; Leviticus 9:7). They were involved in all kinds of sacrifices—guilt offerings, sin offerings, offerings of atonement, and more—and making these offerings was such a full-time job that the Levitical priests (the priests were appointed from the tribe of Levi) would not have time to work the land as did people from other tribes. The sacrifices they offered only temporarily covered up the sins of the people.

In contrast to the sacrifices administered by the Levitical priests, Jesus’ sacrifice was once for all (Hebrews 7:27). Jesus also served as a high priest, but He wasn’t from the tribe of Levi (He was from the tribe of Judah), and His high priesthood was very different. Jesus was “holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens” (Hebrews 7:26, NASB).

Because He was sinless, He didn’t have to offer sacrifices for His own guilt. He owed no debt for any sin and could offer Himself as a substitutionary sacrifice for those who did owe God a debt for their sin. The Levitical high priests had to offer sacrifices daily for their sins and those of the people. Jesus did not have to do that. He offered up Himself one time as a sacrifice and in so doing paid for all of the sins of all of the people—He did this “once for all when He offered Himself” (Hebrews 7:27).

The author of Hebrews goes so far as to say that the high priests were “weak” (Hebrews 7:28) because of their own sin, their personal need for sacrifices, and the temporality of the sacrifices they offered. In contrast, Jesus was “perfect,” as He had no sin and therefore no personal need for sacrifices, and the sacrifice He offered was offered only once on the cross.

With that once-for-all sacrifice, Jesus paid for the sin of all humanity. As John puts it, Jesus is the propitiation (or satisfaction) for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2). This means that the price Jesus paid was sufficient to satisfy the debt owed. Jesus’ death was a sufficient sacrifice to cover once and for all the sins of everyone. John also explains that Jesus’ sacrifice had to be applied to each individual—by believing in Jesus, each person would have life in His name (John 20:31).

Jesus’ sacrifice was once for all (Hebrews 7:27), and rather than go to a priest who would make a temporary sacrifice for our sin, we are told to simply believe (or trust) in Christ as the One who has resolved the sin issue on our behalf and provided for our forgiveness and new life.

Paul reminds us in Ephesians 2:8–10 that we have been saved by grace through faith, and that salvation is not of our own works or efforts, but it is a gift of God. Because of this, no one can boast in themselves—instead, we should give Him thanks and exalt Him. In saving us He gave us new life and provided us a path to fulfill our design. This was all only made possible because Jesus’ sacrifice was once for all (Hebrews 7:27). Because of His sacrifice, we can have peace with God and are no longer subject to His wrath; instead, we are children who are beloved by our heavenly Father.
GotQuestions

--and do me a favor @praise_yeshua --do look up the word "Penal"

Jesus was not offered on the mercy seat. Nor was Jesus offered on the day of Atonement (Yom Kippur)......

You're missing my point. There is no appeal to Jesus fulfilling the law by accomplishing the demands of the law. He accomplished the law by dying for us.

Which you know is contrary to what most any Orthodox Jew accepts.
 
Last edited:
"Penal"
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the KJV.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the NKJV.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the NLT.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the NIV.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the ESV.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the CSB.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the NASB20.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the LSB.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the NET.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the RSV.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the ASV.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the YLT.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the DBY.
occurs 0 time in 0 verse in the WEB.

[sorry, I couldn't resist.] :)

You would think it would given the influence of Latin upon early English Bibles... :)
 
Propitiation- the turning away of God's anger/wrath- to appease an angry god.

Expiation- the covering for our sins

The fact is the word does not need to be in Scripture but the meaning of the word/concept is in Scripture. So the Trinity can be proven by its concept and meaning.
Penal is not in Scriptures but definitely implied
Appeasing an angry god in the atonement cannot hence propitiation is wrong. Expiation is the correct meaning in the Atonement.
Uh-incorrect.

propitiation.
Greek. hilasterion. Only here and Heb_9:5. The word comes to us from the Septuagint. In Exo_25:17 kapporeth (cover) is rendered hilasterion epithema, propitiatory cover, the cover of the ark on which the blood was sprinkled as the means of propitiation.

A propitiation (hilastērion). The only other N.T. example of this word is in Heb_9:5 where we have the “cherubim overshadowing the mercy seat” (to hilastērion). In Hebrews the adjective is used as a substantive or as “the propitiatory place” But that idea does not suit here. Deissmann (Bible Studies, pp. 124-35) has produced examples from inscriptions where it is used as an adjective and as meaning “a votive offering” or “propitiatory gift.” Hence he concludes about Rom_3:25 : “The crucified Christ is the votive gift of the Divine Love for the salvation of men.”
God gave his Son as the means of propitiation (1Jn_2:2). Hilastērion is an adjective (hilastērios) from hilaskomai, to make propitiation (Heb_2:17) and is kin in meaning to hilasmos, propitiation (1Jn_2:2; 1Jn_4:10). There is no longer room for doubting its meaning in Rom_3:25.


Rom_3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

1Jn_2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

1Jn_4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

̔λαστήριον
hilastērion
hil-as-tay’-ree-on
Neuter of a derivative of G2433; an expiatory (place or thing), that is, (concretely) an atoning victim, or (specifically) the lid of the Ark (in the Temple): - mercyseat, propitiation.
LXX related word(s)
H3727 kapporet
H5835 azarah

Matter of fact-look up the word "expiate or expiation" and give me the Scripture references.
 
Penal is not in Scriptures but definitely implied

Uh-incorrect.

propitiation.
Greek. hilasterion. Only here and Heb_9:5. The word comes to us from the Septuagint. In Exo_25:17 kapporeth (cover) is rendered hilasterion epithema, propitiatory cover, the cover of the ark on which the blood was sprinkled as the means of propitiation.

A propitiation (hilastērion). The only other N.T. example of this word is in Heb_9:5 where we have the “cherubim overshadowing the mercy seat” (to hilastērion). In Hebrews the adjective is used as a substantive or as “the propitiatory place” But that idea does not suit here. Deissmann (Bible Studies, pp. 124-35) has produced examples from inscriptions where it is used as an adjective and as meaning “a votive offering” or “propitiatory gift.” Hence he concludes about Rom_3:25 : “The crucified Christ is the votive gift of the Divine Love for the salvation of men.” God gave his Son as the means of propitiation (1Jn_2:2). Hilastērion is an adjective (hilastērios) from hilaskomai, to make propitiation (Heb_2:17) and is kin in meaning to hilasmos, propitiation (1Jn_2:2; 1Jn_4:10). There is no longer room for doubting its meaning in Rom_3:25.

Rom_3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

1Jn_2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

1Jn_4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

̔λαστήριον
hilastērion
hil-as-tay’-ree-on
Neuter of a derivative of G2433; an expiatory (place or thing), that is, (concretely) an atoning victim, or (specifically) the lid of the Ark (in the Temple): - mercyseat, propitiation.
LXX related word(s)
H3727 kapporet
H5835 azarah

Matter of fact-look up the word "expiate or expiation" and give me the Scripture references.
I have written a thesis paper you affirmed , agreed with that refutes what you just claimed. Should I show you your own words affirming my thesis paper that refutes PSA ?
 
I have written a thesis paper you affirmed , agreed with that refutes what you just claimed. Should I show you your own words affirming my thesis paper that refutes PSA ?
Don't jump around-you said hilasterion is not the correct word-now show me scripture references where expiate-expiation occur.


ἱλαστήριον
hilastērion
hil-as-tay'-ree-on
Neuter of a derivative of G2433; an expiatory (place or thing), that is, (concretely) an atoning victim, or (specifically) the lid of the Ark (in the Temple): - mercyseat, propitiation.

LXX related word(s)
H3727 kapporet
H5835 azarah

Thayer Definition:
1) relating to an appeasing or expiating, having placating or expiating force, expiatory; a means of appeasing or expiating, a propitiation
1a) used of the cover of the ark of the covenant in the Holy of Holies, which was sprinkled with the blood of the expiatory victim on the annual day of atonement (this rite signifying that the life of the people, the loss of which they had merited by their sins, was offered to God in the blood as the life of the victim, and that God by this ceremony was appeased and their sins expiated); hence the lid of expiation, the propitiatory
1b) an expiatory sacrifice
1c) a expiatory victim
Part of Speech: noun neuter
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from a derivative of G2433
More in NTW: G6327

Nothing here of appeasing an angry god-Propitiation.

Now show me where expiation occurs in Scripture.
 
Don't jump around-you said hilasterion is not the correct word-now show me scripture references where expiate-expiation occur.


ἱλαστήριον
hilastērion
hil-as-tay'-ree-on
Neuter of a derivative of G2433; an expiatory (place or thing), that is, (concretely) an atoning victim, or (specifically) the lid of the Ark (in the Temple): - mercyseat, propitiation.

LXX related word(s)
H3727 kapporet
H5835 azarah

Thayer Definition:
1) relating to an appeasing or expiating, having placating or expiating force, expiatory; a means of appeasing or expiating, a propitiation
1a) used of the cover of the ark of the covenant in the Holy of Holies, which was sprinkled with the blood of the expiatory victim on the annual day of atonement (this rite signifying that the life of the people, the loss of which they had merited by their sins, was offered to God in the blood as the life of the victim, and that God by this ceremony was appeased and their sins expiated); hence the lid of expiation, the propitiatory
1b) an expiatory sacrifice
1c) a expiatory victim
Part of Speech: noun neuter
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from a derivative of G2433
More in NTW: G6327

Nothing here of appeasing an angry god-Propitiation.

Now show me where expiation occurs in Scripture.
its means expiate,not propitiate. nice try.

we are talking about the meaning of the word not the translation of the word. there is a difference with a distinction. please try and follow the argument.
 
its means expiate,not propitiate. nice try.

we are talking about the meaning of the word not the translation of the word. there is a difference with a distinction. please try and follow the argument.
I rest my case-thank you for making MY case.
 
No problem-scrap the Trinity, it is not in Scripture.
NO! ... Just don't tell people to "look up the word Trinity" as proof.
Instead, send them to Luke 3:21-22 where they can read about the time that ALL THREE MEMBERS make an appearance at the same time.
Or send them to John 1:1-14 where it is clear that the PERSON they knew as Jesus was GOD before the creation of the world.

So, where is this WRATH of the Father poured on the Son found in the Word of God?
Let us discuss THAT verse.
 
Matthew 26:26-29
While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.”
27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

Hebrews 9:22
Because all things are purged by blood in The Written Law, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

Leviticus 4:20,26,35
And he shall do with the bullock as he did with the bullock for a sin offering, so shall he do with this: and the priest shall make an atonement for them, and it shall be forgiven them

Leviticus 6:7
And the priest shall make an atonement for him before the LORD: and it shall be forgiven him for any thing of all that he hath done in trespassing therein.

Leviticus 17:11
For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for your souls upon the altar; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.

Hebrews 9
Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary. 2 A tabernacle was set up. In its first room were the lampstand and the table with its consecrated bread; this was called the Holy Place. 3 Behind the second curtain was a room called the Most Holy Place, 4 which had the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant. This ark contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron’s staff that had budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant. 5 Above the ark were the cherubim of the Glory, overshadowing the atonement cover. But we cannot discuss these things in detail now.


6 When everything had been arranged like this, the priests entered regularly into the outer room to carry on their ministry. 7 But only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed in ignorance. 8 The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still functioning. 9 This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. 10 They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings—external regulations applying until the time of the new order.


The Blood of Christ

11 But when Christ came as high priest of the good things that are now already here,[a] he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands, that is to say, is not a part of this creation. 12 He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining[b] eternal redemption. 13 The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. 14 How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death,[c] so that we may serve the living God!


15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.


16 In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, 17 because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. 18 This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. 19 When Moses had proclaimed every command of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. 20 He said, “This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep.” 21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. 25 Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26 Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

Conclusion: The forgiveness of sins is found only in the blood of Christ- His life which He gave as a sacrifice for sin. That is the heart of the Atonement. It is what the New Covenant is found upon His blood/life which was given for our sins. Forgiveness is only found in His blood/life that He gave on our behalf. That is how are sins are removed and taken away. That is what the Law required for sin was the blood of the animal/sacrifice.

There is no "punishment" above anywhere. There is a sacrifice provided which covers and provides forgiveness of sins through the blood. The entire book of Hebrews is built upon the OT Law and how it is fulfilled in Christ. Why did the Author of Hebrews leave out the "penal" aspect of the Law with the sacrifice ?

hope this helps !!!
 
NO! ... Just don't tell people to "look up the word Trinity" as proof.
Instead, send them to Luke 3:21-22 where they can read about the time that ALL THREE MEMBERS make an appearance at the same time.
Or send them to John 1:1-14 where it is clear that the PERSON they knew as Jesus was GOD before the creation of the world.

So, where is this WRATH of the Father poured on the Son found in the Word of God?
Let us discuss THAT verse.
its called double standards lol
 
Back
Top Bottom