Where's the wrath??

[brightfame52]

@Joe

Please explain what you mean when you stated, "He specifically satisfied Gods wrath in their behalf".

Simply this,He died for their sins. That delivered them from the wrath to come 1 Thess 1:9-10

9 For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God;

10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

Rom 5:9

9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

See wrath comes upon men because of their sins Eph 5

5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.

 

[Joe]

@Joe



Simply this,He died for their sins. That delivered them from the wrath to come 1 Thess 1:9-10

9 For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God;

10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

Rom 5:9

9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

See wrath comes upon men because of their sins Eph 5

5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.

Thank you for answering. I agree with you our Lord's death saves us from the wrath to come.

Please let me poke at you. Do you think God poured out wrath upon His Son?

I will clarify my stance. God sent His Son into the world explicitly to suffer death at the hands of evil men led by Satan to die for the remission of our sins. That our Lord obeyed His Father's will to die for our sins and at no time did God punish our Lord, and God was pleased when evil men led by Satan bruised Him according to His determined purpose and foreknowledge. It was God's will for it to happen; therefore, He has ultimately put Him to grief, setting forth His own Son as a guilt offering for our sins; that the death of the sinless Son of Man for our sins removes our guilt before God, since He is the One who graciously made such provision that can only be received through faith.

God Bless

@Johann

 

[Johann]

Thank you for answering. I agree with you our Lord's death saves us from the wrath to come.

Please let me poke at you. Do you think God poured out wrath upon His Son?

I will clarify my stance. God sent His Son into the world explicitly to suffer death at the hands of evil men led by Satan to die for the remission of our sins. That our Lord obeyed His Father's will to die for our sins and at no time did God punish our Lord, and God was pleased when evil men led by Satan bruised Him according to His determined purpose and foreknowledge. It was God's will for it to happen; therefore, He has ultimately put Him to grief, setting forth His own Son as a guilt offering for our sins.

God Bless

@Johann

I love the way you tag me brother.


Isa 53:1 Who hath believed our report? And to whom is the Zero'a Hashem [Yeshayah 52:10] revealed?

Isa 53:2 For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a Shoresh (Root, Shoresh Yishai, Moshiach, Yeshayah 11:10, Sanhedrin93b) out of a dry ground; he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire [Chaggai 2:7] him.

Isa 53:3 He is despised and chadal ishim (rejected by men); a man of sorrows, and acquainted with suffering; and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

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 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own derech (way; see Prov 16:25); and Hashem hath laid on him [Moshiach] the avon (iniquity, the guilt that separates from G-d) of us all.

Isa 53:7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; he is brought as a seh (lamb; see Shemot 12:3) to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.

Isa 53:8 He was taken from prison and from judgment; and who of his generation declared? For he was cut off [ Dan_9:26 ; Lev_17:10 ] out of Eretz Chayyim [this refers to the mot of Moshiach Ben Dovid, see Isa_53:12 ] mipesha ami (for the transgression of my people [Yisroel]) -nega (plague cf Psa_91:10 ) lamo ([fell] on him [i.e., Moshiach; in light of Psa_11:7 and Job_22:2 we are warranted in saying the suffix is a singular, "him," not "them". Cf Gen_9:26-27 ; Deu_33:2 ; Isa_44:15 ; also compare 1Ch_21:17 ]).

Isa 53:9 And he made his kever (grave) with the resha'im, and with the oisher (rich man; see Mt 27:57-60) bemotayv (in his deaths, intensive plural should be translated singular, death); because he had done no chamas (violence), neither was any mirmah (deceit) in his mouth. T.N. We stray as sheep; we return in Moshiach as children (zera); the Techiyas HaMoshiach (Resurrection of Moshiach) predicted in v. 10 [Dead Sea Scrolls Isaiah Scroll says Moshiach "will see the light [of life];" see also the Targum HaShivim]

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.

Isa 53:11 He [Hashem] shall see of the travail of his [Moshiach's] nefesh, and shall be satisfied; by knowledge of him [Moshiach] shall Tzadik Avdi ["My Righteous Servant," Moshiach, Zecharyah 3:8, Yirmeyah 23:5; Zecharyah 6:11-12, Ezra 3:8 Yehoshua, Yeshua shmo] justify many (Ro 5:1); for he [Moshiach] shall bear their avon (iniquities).

Isa 53:12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his nefesh unto mavet (death); and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he nasah (Lv 16:22, carried) (like the Yom Kippur scapegoat) the sin of many, and made intercession [did the work of a mafgi'a, intercessor] for the transgressors [see Lk 23:34 OJBC].

Please, please give Michael Brown's video a listen @Joe A young Michael-on FIRE for the Messiah!

God bless
Johann.

 

[brightfame52]

Thank you for answering. I agree with you our Lord's death saves us from the wrath to come.

Please let me poke at you. Do you think God poured out wrath upon His Son?

I will clarify my stance. God sent His Son into the world explicitly to suffer death at the hands of evil men led by Satan to die for the remission of our sins. That our Lord obeyed His Father's will to die for our sins and at no time did God punish our Lord, and God was pleased when evil men led by Satan bruised Him according to His determined purpose and foreknowledge. It was God's will for it to happen; therefore, He has ultimately put Him to grief, setting forth His own Son as a guilt offering for our sins; that the death of the sinless Son of Man for our sins removes our guilt before God, since He is the One who graciously made such provision that can only be received through faith.

God Bless

@Johann

I disagree with the statement that He wasn't punished/chastisement for the sins of the elect. He died a penalty death, and Im not going to go back and forth with you about punishment, death and the suffering was due to the sins Gods elect deserved ,its a punishment of justice against sin.

 

[Joe]

I disagree with the statement that He wasn't punished/chastisement for the sins of the elect. He died a penalty death, and Im not going to go back and forth with you about punishment, death and the suffering was due to the sins Gods elect deserved ,its a punishment of justice against sin.

It seems we do disagree on God's merciful provision of a sin offering and how that makes atonement for our sins. A sin offering is just that, an offering of a sacrifice unto death because without death there is no remission of sins. Jesus, our Lord willingly offered His life unto death for the remission of our sins. And while it was His Father's will for Him to suffer death for our sins, no one took His life, He gave it.

His purposed death, like the purposed death of a spotless animal that was sacrificed unto death for sin in the OT, makes atonement for our sins. And we know "the law has but a shadow of the good things to come".

It has nothing to do with God expending wrath; this is nowhere to be found in the bible, but has to do with satisfying the righteousness of God that sin must be judged and the judgement for sin is death. This is why our Lord died, "For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said, “Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me" (Heb 10:4-5)

We are justified because our sinless Lord purposely died for our sins; for God judged His death on account for our sins. This is the graciously merciful and loving provision of God; to permit the purposed death of a sinless One to die for the sins of the sinner; thus effectively reconciling the account of the sinner's wage of death as paid in full. We were held under judgment by our sins, but our Lord's death ransomed us from death and the grave-hades.

BTW, chastisement is not the same as punishment. Please click here to a thread about chastisement.

God Bless

@Johann

 

[civic]

It seems we do disagree on God's merciful provision of a sin offering and how that makes atonement for our sins. A sin offering is just that, an offering of a sacrifice unto death because without death there is no remission of sins. Jesus, our Lord willingly offered His life unto death for the remission of our sins. And while it was His Father's will for Him to suffer death for our sins, no one took His life, He gave it.

His purposed death, like the purposed death of a spotless animal that was sacrificed unto death for sin in the OT, makes atonement for our sins. And we know "the law has but a shadow of the good things to come".

It has nothing to do with God expending wrath; this is nowhere to be found in the bible, but has to do with satisfying the righteousness of God that sin must be judged and the judgement for sin is death. This is why our Lord died, "For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said, “Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me" (Heb 10:4-5)

We are justified because our sinless Lord purposely died for our sins; for God judged His death on account for our sins. This is the graciously merciful and loving provision of God; to permit the purposed death of a sinless One to die for the sins of the sinner; thus effectively reconciling the account of the sinner's wage of death as paid in full. We were held under judgment by our sins, but our Lord's death ransomed us from death and the grave-hades.

BTW, chastisement is not the same as punishment. Please click here to a thread about chastisement.

God Bless

@Johann

Amen !!!

 

[brightfame52]

@Joe

BTW, chastisement is not the same as punishment. Please click here to a thread about chastisement.

I believe it is the same, just a matter of semantics. If you look up chastisement in a english dictionary you have:

1. severe criticism; a rebuke or strong reprimand.
2. corporal punishment; a beating.
3. 
   
4. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/chastisement
   I do want to ask this one thing, why do you feel its necessary to say Christ wasnt punished for the sins of the elect ? Do you believe in the substitutionary death of Christ for sinners ?
   
   
   

 

[Johann]

@Joe



I believe it is the same, just a matter of semantics. If you look up chastisement in a english dictionary you have:

1. severe criticism; a rebuke or strong reprimand.
2. corporal punishment; a beating.
3. 
   
4. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/chastisement
   I do want to ask this one thing, why do you feel its necessary to say Christ wasnt punished for the sins of the elect ? Do you believe in the substitutionary death of Christ for sinners ?
   
   

Excellent question-I "suppose" we can delete the vicarious, substitutionary element of Messiah's death-

The concept of Jesus' death being substitutionary—meaning that He died in place of sinners, taking the punishment they deserved—is a central tenet of Christian theology. This idea is supported by various New Testament scriptures. Here are some key references along with an explanation of their meanings and relevant morphological insights:

Isaiah 53:4-6 (Prophetic Foretelling)

Text: "Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering... the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray... and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all."

Meaning: This passage, though in the Old Testament, is frequently interpreted as prophetic of Jesus' substitutionary death. It describes the Servant (interpreted by Christians as Jesus) taking on the suffering and punishment due to others.
Morphology: The Hebrew word for "pain" (חֳלָיֵנוּ, choleynu) and "suffering" (מַכְאֹבֵינוּ, mak'oveynu) denote physical and emotional affliction, which Jesus is said to bear on behalf of humanity. The phrase "the Lord has laid on him" (וַיהוָה הִפְגִּיעַ בּוֹ, v'Adonai hifgi'a bo) uses the causative form of the verb פגע (paga), indicating that God caused the iniquities to fall upon Him.
Matthew 20:28

Text: "The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."
Meaning: Jesus describes His mission as one of service and sacrifice, explicitly stating that His life would be given as a ransom, implying a substitutionary role.
Morphology: The Greek word for "ransom" (λύτρον, lytron) suggests a price paid to release someone from bondage, indicating substitution.
Mark 10:45

Text: Similar to Matthew 20:28, this verse repeats the idea of Jesus giving His life as a ransom for many.
Meaning: Reinforces the concept of Jesus' life as a sacrificial payment in place of many.
Morphology: The term "for" (ἀντί, anti) in Greek often means "in place of," underscoring the substitutionary nature of His death.
John 10:11, 15

Text: "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep... I lay down my life for the sheep."
Meaning: Jesus identifies Himself as the shepherd who sacrifices His life for the well-being of the sheep, implying a protective and substitutionary role.
Morphology: The Greek verb for "lays down" (τίθησιν, tithēsin) and "for" (ὑπέρ, hyper) denotes a voluntary giving up of life on behalf of others.
Romans 5:8

Text: "But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us."
Meaning: This verse underscores the substitutionary nature of Jesus' death, emphasizing that He died for sinners.
Morphology: The Greek preposition "for" (ὑπέρ, hyper) again indicates substitution, suggesting that Christ's death was in place of sinners.
2 Corinthians 5:21

Text: "God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God."
Meaning: This verse emphasizes the exchange where Jesus, who was sinless, took on sin so that believers might receive righteousness, highlighting substitution.
Morphology: The phrase "to be sin for us" (ἁμαρτίαν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, hamartian hyper hēmōn) uses the preposition ὑπέρ (hyper) to denote substitution.
Galatians 3:13

Text: "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: 'Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole.'"
Meaning: Jesus takes on the curse of the law that was due to sinners, thereby redeeming them.
Morphology: The Greek phrase "becoming a curse for us" (γενόμενος κατάρα ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, genomenos katara hyper hēmōn) again uses ὑπέρ (hyper), indicating substitution.
1 Peter 2:24

Text: "He himself bore our sins in his body on the cross, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed."
Meaning: Jesus bears the sins of humanity in His body on the cross, indicating He took the punishment due to others.
Morphology: The verb "bore" (ἀνήνεγκεν, anēnenken) suggests taking up and carrying away, and "in his body" (ἐν τῷ σώματι αὐτοῦ, en tō sōmati autou) indicates substitution.
1 Peter 3:18

Text: "For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God."
Meaning: Jesus, the righteous one, suffers for the unrighteous, highlighting the substitutionary nature of His death.

Morphology: The phrase "the righteous for the unrighteous" (δίκαιος ὑπὲρ ἀδίκων, dikaios hyper adikōn) uses ὑπέρ (hyper) to denote substitution.

These references collectively support the theological concept that Jesus' death was substitutionary, meaning He died in place of sinners, taking upon Himself the punishment that was due to them. The use of specific Greek and Hebrew terms in these verses underscores the substitutionary aspect of Jesus' sacrificial death.

 

[brightfame52]

@Johann

The concept of Jesus' death being substitutionary—meaning that He died in place of sinners, taking the punishment they deserved—is a central tenet of Christian theology

exactly, i was reading this morning Rom 5:6

For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

He died for the ungodly elect, not for Himself.

But i will give the poster the benefit of the doubt, as far as i know he has not denied the substitutionary element of Christs death.

 

[civic]

The Reformers, as we know, claimed they were recovering the truth of the Gospel to align their doctrine with the New Testament and the earliest Christians. Believing the Middle Ages had corrupted Christianity, the Reformers looked to redefine many of the doctrines of the Church. Luther goes so far as to say that Christ becomes the greatest and only sinner on earth while on the cross. Luther adopted parts of Anselm’s ideas but with more of a dichotomy or conflict between the wrath of God and the love of God.

We see a very real development of penal substitutionary atonement theory in John Calvin. Calvin took Anselm’s groundwork and expanded in an even more legalistic way. He applied his understanding of criminal law to the equation - man is a criminal and must be punished by God, who is angered by sin. The Son of God is sent to earth to bear the immense wrath of the God of all for us so that God may then be merciful. Calvin says things like “God, then, must of necessity look upon us in the person of His own Son, or else he is bound to hate us and abhor us,” “For since by nature we are unclean, and utterly rejected and cursed by God,” and talks about the “hatred between him and us.” These concepts are foreign to us in the East and yet critical to penal substitutionary atonement. The Early Church had no concept of God imputing the guilt of our sins to Christ, and he, in our place, bearing the punishment we deserve. Christ making payment for our sins, which satisfies the wrath and the righteousness of God so that He could forgive sinners without compromising his holiness, is a late addition to Christian through.

One of the most well-known verses in the New Testament to my faith group growing up was Romans 3:23-26. It’s part of the “Road to Romans” evangelism track. It’s interesting to read it while contemplating penal atonement - nowhere does it say Christ is punished in our place (we’ll tackle the word “propitiation” in just a minute). The same is true for the verses cited in favor of penal substitution - nowhere do they say Christ was a substitution, that Christ was punished by the Father, or that God’s wrath had to be sated by Christ.

Because of the fall, our ability to remain in union with God was damaged.

Now I want to be clear here - I have not been discussing atonement in general, but the specific doctrine of penal atonement substitution - the idea that the Father unleashed His wrath on Christ on the cross to satisfy His need for blood for forgiveness. God needed someone his equal in rank to satisfy the breaking of the law in order for justice to be fulfilled. The Father pours out His wrath on Christ in order to satisfy the offenses against His Law since Adam. It is this that I find preposterous, not the idea that Christ does atone for us. I have to ask: why would a good, loving God have to take out His wrath on His creation?

 

[civic]

Continued

Serious issues with PSA​

Biblical Atonement​

Old Testament sacrifices don’t align with a penal substitution - the animals that were sacrificed were offered as an atonement, not to become a substitute and take punishment, but became sacred and were eaten. Let’s look at the Passover lamb and Christ - we see a correlation throughout the New Testament of Christ to the Passover lamb of Exodus 12 (John 1:29, 1 Peter 1:19, Revelation 5 to name just a few). The Passover lamb wasn’t a sacrifice of substitution for sin, but instead, it identified those in the homes with the blood marking the doorposts were part of the Chosen People. If the lamb had “become sin,” it would have been unclean; the Israelites definitely would not have eaten the lamb as they were instructed to do in Exodus 12:6.

The Early Church saw Christ as the Passover lamb as we see in John 1:29, 1 Corinthians 5:7, Revelation 13:8 and the Book of Hebrews makes extensive references to Christ’s sacrifice when speaking of His priesthood. Just as the Passover lamb becomes a meal, so does the crucified Christ in the Eucharist. The Passover lamb is sacrificed and its blood marks the doorposts of Israel as, Fr. Stephen Freeman points out:

The lamb of Passover is slain and the doorposts of Israel marked with his blood as a means of defeating the “destroyer,” who kills the firstborn of Egypt. This destruction of Egypt (along with the drowning in the Red Sea) are all God’s “getting glory” over Pharoah. It is the proper context for understanding Christ’s description of His death as His glorification.

It’s not just the Passover lamb that doesn’t align with penal substitutionary atonement in the Old Testament, but the sin offerings as well. The sin offerings are implemented in Leviticus, the animals are sacrificed to atone for sin, not to die so that the person offering could live. The animal didn’t have sin placed on it or become sin. The scapegoat, however, would symbolically bear the sins of the people, and it was sent out from the city not sacrificed. The one-time sins are placed on the animal being offered; it isn’t killed (see Leviticus 16:10).

 

[civic]

Continued

Old Testament​

PSA runs counter to the Scriptures. Death isn’t a punishment but a consequence of Adam’s sin. Genesis 2:17 doesn’t say that God will kill Adam when he eats the fruit, that he’ll be punished by God, but that he will die. It’s a result of his action rather than a punishment inflicted by God. When humanity sinned, death came into the world. It wasn’t God’s punishment but a consequence.

To quote from Alexander Renault’s book Rediscovering Tulip, “To walk away from God (i.e., to sin) is by definition, death. Death is the realm of “Not God.” Likewise, if I pull the plug on my own life support system, the result is death. No one else is killing me. If I jump off the roof, after being warned by my mother not to, and I end up breaking my leg, does that mean that my mother broke my leg? No, that was simply the result of my own choice. Christ gave Himself up to death. If death is an active punishment from God, then Christ was punished by His Father (per penal substitution). But if death is the result of sin, then it is an outside enemy and not God’s own wrath.” Plus, Jeremiah 31:2-30, Ezekial 18:20, and Deuteronomy 24:16 tell us that a person is put to death for his own sin and that the wickedness of the wicked is upon himself. That isn’t the case in penal substitution.

Looking at the Law, a person who murdered couldn’t sacrifice an animal to atone for it. He must pay. It’s also important to note that verses like Deuteronomy 24:16, 2 Kings 14:6, 2 Chronicles/4 Kings 25:4, and Ezekiel 18:19-20 make a strong case against the idea of substitutionary punishments.

God’s Wrath and Unconditional Love​

PSA removes unconditional love from God and God doesn’t actually forgive. God can’t love us unless He has an outlet for his wrath. Again from Renault, “His “self-giving” love is only made possible by His “self-satisfying” justice.” If His love is conditional on his wrath being appeased, God also doesn’t forgive us - unlike the parable of the servant forgiven his debt or the prodigal Son, God doesn’t welcome us back or forgive us, but instead requires someone else to pay the debt, contrary to how Christ explains the love of the Father for us. Plus, the Father is changed - He is angry with us, Christ bares his wrath, and now He loves us like he loves Christ - we aren’t forgiven, God is merely appeased!

PSA also renders Christ’s sacrifice imperfect. God’s wrath remains, but only on some. Christ’s sacrifice for all of humanity is contingent. God is only appeased for some, not all. This is remedied in Calvinism by the belief that God foreknew his elect and sent Christ to pay for their sins.

 

[civic]

Continued

The Nature of Salvation & Redemption​

We have the question of what exactly is meant by salvation. In the Bible, salvation is so much more than avoiding eternal punishment like liberation from bondage (Exodus 14:30, 15:2, Psalms 106:21), return from exile (Isaiah 45:17), and rescue from danger (Psalms 27:1, 51:12, 65:5, 69:2).

Penal substitution belittles salvation to merely a transactional event on the cross, a legal barter made by Jesus for us, not a transformational redemption and largely ignores the resurrection. Sin is still a part of our lives, but we are no longer defined by it, but by grace and love (Romans 6). Instead, we are transformed by Christ’s death and resurrection. Sin is still a part of our lives and our world, but we are no longer defined by it, but by grace (Romans 6). We are now agents of God’s Kingdom, here and now, not some distant faraway concept (1 Corinthians 13:12).

Division of the Trinity​

This becomes problematic in the light of the Trinity when we look at Christ on the cross. The Father pours out his wrath on the Son. The Father has wrath, and for his need for justice, so He must punish. The Son, on the cross, asks for forgiveness, making a conflict in the divine will - punishment versus forgiveness. Taking it to the furthest logical conclusion puts the Son and the Father at odds, creating a divide within the indivisible Trinity. It also calls to question Christ’s place in the Godhead. Shouldn’t Christ’s holiness also be offended? Why would the Father need appeasement and not Christ or the Holy Spirit?

And if God the Father is truly punishing Christ, that is also sowing very real division within the Trinity. If the Father inflicts torture on the Son, how can the perfect love and unity of the Trinity survive?

A Personal View​

I am an imperfect human. I am an imperfect father. I have imperfect love. Yet I can say without question that I do not need to see my daughter forced to suffer to forgive her. I don’t need her to be punished. I don’t need anyone else to either. When she makes a poor choice and disobeys me, I don’t become wrathful against her and need to see her punished to be willing to forgive her, much less to love her again. If, in my imperfect love, I don’t become overwhelmed by wrath and anger, demanding justice, how can I view God, who is beyond love, in that light?

 

[civic]

Continued @Johann

What About Isaiah 53?​

Isaiah 53 is a paramount prophecy to defenders of penal substitutionary theory, yet it is often taken out of context. Bold claim, I know, but hear me out. No where in Isaiah does it say that the Father is punishing Christ. Actually, verse 4 says that despite the fact he bears our griefs and sorrows “yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted.” Let’s reword that - humanity’s perception is that He is afflicted by God, not that God has smitten Him. Another key passage is verse 5 which tells us “by His stripes we are healed,” not “by His stripes the Father is appeased.” Let’s look at a literal translation from the Septuagint:
“The one our sins bore and on account of us he was grieved. And we considered him to be a misery, and for calamity by God, and for ill-treatment. But he was wounded because of our sins and was made infirm on account of our lawless deeds.” One should read Isaiah as a prophecy of Christ’s healing work, viewing Christ’s work as more encompassing than the narrow focus PSA allocates it to.

So What’s the Alternative?​

The Greek word translated to “atonement” in the Bible is “hilasterion“ (ιλαστηριον). In Romans 3:23-25 we read “…for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation (ιλαστηριον) by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness because, in his divine forbearance, he had passed over former sins.” The word here is a Greek word, so a literal translation can be tricky. One translation is the word propitiation, which implies an act of appeasing or making God happy to either gain favor or avoid retribution.

As Eric Hyde argues, “If one chooses to interpret hilasterion as propitiation (literally: “to make favorable,” with the implication of placating or appeasing the deity), then the entire Western notion of substitutionary atonement fits well.” But, if one uses the word expiation, which implies a cleansing and removal of sin, this fits less into the penal substitutionary atonement model. This turns the death and resurrection of Christ around - no longer is Christ trying to appease an angry God the Father who has wrath that must be satisfied, instead Christ is lovingly redeeming and restoring humanity. Let’s also consider that hilasterion is used in the Septuagint to mean the “mercy seat” or “thing that atones.” It also appears again in Hebrews 9:5 as the mercy seat. Given that context to hilasterion, it makes more sense to that Christ’s self-sacrifice was an act for the removal of our sins instead of an act to appease or pacify an angry Father, so He can forgive.

We know that death entered the world through sin and is something that every living thing on earth is subject to. In Christ’s Incarnation, He reunited God and man in a way that only the Eternal Logos, being fully God and taking on humanity. Through His death, Christ defeated our enemy, death, and restored the human race (2 Timothy 1:10 and 1 Corinthians 15:55-57). We share in Christ’s death and resurrection (Romans 6:8-14; 7:6) and, through Christ’s atonement we’ve been made clean and freed from sin (Ephesians 1:7; John 1:7), reuniting us to God and making us partakers of the divine nature (2 Peter 1:4).

Because of sins, we were held captive; the righteous dead were filing into hades. Christ came to set them free. Jesus had to go into the realm of death - that meant becoming a human, entering the world through a woman, living an earthly life, and then allowing himself to be killed. We see him on the cross, not like he’s writhing in agony, but looking more like a hero. He maintains a heroic status in Orthodoxy; we look upon him as our Redeemer, Savior, Deliverer, who, with His boldness, and his power, and his compassion, suffered, and died, and went into hades in order to set us free. The image of the resurrection looks different than European art. In our iconography, Christ is standing on the broken gates of hell, lifting Adam and Eve out of hades.
Hebrews 2:14-15 tells us “that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the Devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong bondage.“
Christ’s work is redemptive. Christ’s sacrifice was restorative. Christ brings God to man, as only one who is God and man can, bridging the gap, conquering death, and restoring us to life. This is the good news in the Scriptures. This is what has been taught by the Church since Pentecost.https://liveorthodoxy.com/en/2020/03/06/2020-03-07-penal-substitutionary-theory-is-a-poor-substitution-for-biblical-atonement/

hope this helps !!!

 

[TomL]

The martyring of all the Apostles..... save for John

(See Foxe's Book of Martyr's ) ...

So, its true that they were "offered", but its not true that they drank The Cup..

How do you know?
As to Drink that Cup, you have to be worthy of it...
In other words, you are about to drink God's Wrath, to pay for the sin of the world, and the only way to qualify for the purpose, is to be the SINLESS< Only Begotten, Son of God.

And none of the Apostles were that one, so their sacrifice, their "cup" was not the same, that was Given to Jesus THE Christ.

Believe it.

That appears to beg the question

Matthew 20:22–23 (UASV) — 22 But Jesus answered, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I am to drink?” They said to him, “We are able.” 23 He said to them, “You will indeed drink my cup, but to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to give, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.”

 

[atpollard]

Just to clarify @atpollard I never advocated that God "poured out His wrath" upon the Son and I concur re your points-however-I still hold to PSA.

If we REDEFINE PSA to exclude the "wrath" of God poured out on the Son, then I, too, support PSA. I am just not sure that we have that authority and the ORTHODOX camp of PSA advocates have inseparably linked "GOD'S WRATH poured out on HIS SON suffering the wrath that WE should be suffering" as THE CORNERSTONE of their atonement theology. If GOD did not beat Christ "like a red-headed stepchild", then GOD must beat Us "like a red-headed stepchild". There is no MERCY possible if God has not gotten his "pound of flesh".

I once accepted and believed it. I understood all the arguments and logic for it. Then one day, someone calmly challenged me to show them where the Bible said that? I KNEW that scripture MUST say it; all those GIANTS of the faith had told me the Bible said it. When I went searching, I found something other than WRATH as God's motivation. God chose to show MERCY on whom He chose to show MERCY.

• Jesus was killed by evil men ... just like the lambs offered at the Temple were killed by sinful men.
• Jesus was innocent of the sin that he died for ... just like the lambs.
• The blood of the lambs offered a temporary cleansing from the guilt of sin ... the blood of Christ offers PERMANENT CLEANSING from the guilt of sin.
• God shows mercy on those who TRUST in Him and LOOK to God for deliverance ... IN FAITH ... exactly like the bronze snake (symbolic of sin judged) raised on a pole (symbolic of sin judged and cursed) that God commanded Moses to create that the PEOPLE might look to and live when the nation stood condemned to death by the Justice of God. Jesus explained this in John 3 to the Teacher of the Law (Nicodemus) as how JESUS would save the people.

... and so Jesus did:
In the INNOCENT Lamb of God, sin stood JUDGED (a bronze snake), which evil men acting according to evil desires and the plan of God [just like the brothers of Joseph in Genesis] hung on a cross - fulfilling the MERCY of God and CURSING SIN ALREADY JUDGED through the perfect sacrifice and the unfathomable GIFT of CHRIST to US. Thus we, like the "already judged and condemned nation" need only LOOK to CHRIST and HIM CRUCIFIED in faith and we are saved - just like those bitten by the poison snakes.

There IS a Penalty (P).
There is a Substitution (S).
There is an Atonement (A).
There is NO wrath ... there is a PLAN and there is GRACE and there is MERCY and there is FAITH.

That is what I believe, but that is not mainline PSA as taught from countless pulpits around the world that involves:

• Jesus having YOUR punishment poured out on HIS flesh sin for sin and blow for blow until the vengeance of the LORD is satisfied and OUR debt is paid in full to the last pound of flesh.

 

[civic]

If we REDEFINE PSA to exclude the "wrath" of God poured out on the Son, then I, too, support PSA. I am just not sure that we have that authority and the ORTHODOX camp of PSA advocates have inseparably linked "GOD'S WRATH poured out on HIS SON suffering the wrath that WE should be suffering" as THE CORNERSTONE of their atonement theology. If GOD did not beat Christ "like a red-headed stepchild", then GOD must beat Us "like a red-headed stepchild". There is no MERCY possible if God has not gotten his "pound of flesh".

I once accepted and believed it. I understood all the arguments and logic for it. Then one day, someone calmly challenged me to show them where the Bible said that? I KNEW that scripture MUST say it; all those GIANTS of the faith had told me the Bible said it. When I went searching, I found something other than WRATH as God's motivation. God chose to show MERCY on whom He chose to show MERCY.

• Jesus was killed by evil men ... just like the lambs offered at the Temple were killed by sinful men.
• Jesus was innocent of the sin that he died for ... just like the lambs.
• The blood of the lambs offered a temporary cleansing from the guilt of sin ... the blood of Christ offers PERMANENT CLEANSING from the guilt of sin.
• God shows mercy on those who TRUST in Him and LOOK to God for deliverance ... IN FAITH ... exactly like the bronze snake (symbolic of sin judged) raised on a pole (symbolic of sin judged and cursed) that God commanded Moses to create that the PEOPLE might look to and live when the nation stood condemned to death by the Justice of God. Jesus explained this in John 3 to the Teacher of the Law (Nicodemus) as how JESUS would save the people.

... and so Jesus did:
In the INNOCENT Lamb of God, sin stood JUDGED (a bronze snake), which evil men acting according to evil desires and the plan of God [just like the brothers of Joseph in Genesis] hung on a cross - fulfilling the MERCY of God and CURSING SIN ALREADY JUDGED through the perfect sacrifice and the unfathomable GIFT of CHRIST to US. Thus we, like the "already judged and condemned nation" need only LOOK to CHRIST and HIM CRUCIFIED in faith and we are saved - just like those bitten by the poison snakes.

There IS a Penalty (P).
There is a Substitution (S).
There is an Atonement (A).
There is NO wrath ... there is a PLAN and there is GRACE and there is MERCY and there is FAITH.

That is what I believe, but that is not mainline PSA as taught from countless pulpits around the world that involves:

• Jesus having YOUR punishment poured out on HIS flesh sin for sin and blow for blow until the vengeance of the LORD is satisfied and OUR debt is paid in full to the last pound of flesh.

Spot on

 

[Johann]

If we REDEFINE PSA to exclude the "wrath" of God poured out on the Son, then I, too, support PSA. I am just not sure that we have that authority and the ORTHODOX camp of PSA advocates have inseparably linked "GOD'S WRATH poured out on HIS SON suffering the wrath that WE should be suffering" as THE CORNERSTONE of their atonement theology. If GOD did not beat Christ "like a red-headed stepchild", then GOD must beat Us "like a red-headed stepchild". There is no MERCY possible if God has not gotten his "pound of flesh".

I once accepted and believed it. I understood all the arguments and logic for it. Then one day, someone calmly challenged me to show them where the Bible said that? I KNEW that scripture MUST say it; all those GIANTS of the faith had told me the Bible said it. When I went searching, I found something other than WRATH as God's motivation. God chose to show MERCY on whom He chose to show MERCY.

• Jesus was killed by evil men ... just like the lambs offered at the Temple were killed by sinful men.
• Jesus was innocent of the sin that he died for ... just like the lambs.
• The blood of the lambs offered a temporary cleansing from the guilt of sin ... the blood of Christ offers PERMANENT CLEANSING from the guilt of sin.
• God shows mercy on those who TRUST in Him and LOOK to God for deliverance ... IN FAITH ... exactly like the bronze snake (symbolic of sin judged) raised on a pole (symbolic of sin judged and cursed) that God commanded Moses to create that the PEOPLE might look to and live when the nation stood condemned to death by the Justice of God. Jesus explained this in John 3 to the Teacher of the Law (Nicodemus) as how JESUS would save the people.

... and so Jesus did:
In the INNOCENT Lamb of God, sin stood JUDGED (a bronze snake), which evil men acting according to evil desires and the plan of God [just like the brothers of Joseph in Genesis] hung on a cross - fulfilling the MERCY of God and CURSING SIN ALREADY JUDGED through the perfect sacrifice and the unfathomable GIFT of CHRIST to US. Thus we, like the "already judged and condemned nation" need only LOOK to CHRIST and HIM CRUCIFIED in faith and we are saved - just like those bitten by the poison snakes.

There IS a Penalty (P).
There is a Substitution (S).
There is an Atonement (A).
There is NO wrath ... there is a PLAN and there is GRACE and there is MERCY and there is FAITH.

That is what I believe, but that is not mainline PSA as taught from countless pulpits around the world that involves:

• Jesus having YOUR punishment poured out on HIS flesh sin for sin and blow for blow until the vengeance of the LORD is satisfied and OUR debt is paid in full to the last pound of flesh.

I have no problem with what you believe is correct brother.

 

[civic]

I have no problem with what you believe is correct brother.

It’s the same thing I believe lol.

 

[Joe]

I have no problem with what you believe is correct brother.

Brother, its the same thing I believe too. That is one of the reasons why I tag you in my responses to other posters, so that you may get an understanding that you may miss otherwise.

No punishment was given by God upon His Son on the cross. His Son died as an offering for sin, whereby God judged sin in His bodily death. No wrath or punishment upon our Lord by His Father. It was 100% the grace of God in merciful loving kindness to judge sin in His Son's death, freeing all from the judgement of their sins when by faith they repent and call out to God for the forgiveness of sins.

God Bless