Where's the wrath??

[Joe]

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.

Very well articulated brother!

God Bless

 

[civic]

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

Amen

 

[Johann]

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

Then you have a problem that it pleased the Father to bruise Messiah, and to crush Him-is it in the Active Tense-or Passive?

 

[Johann]

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

Unless you study Isa 53--

Hebrew Text and Translation
Isaiah 53:5 in Hebrew:
הוּא מְחֹלָל מִפְּשָׁעֵינוּ מְדֻכָּא מֵעֲוֹנוֹתֵינוּ מוּסַר שְׁלוֹמֵנוּ עָלָיו וּבַחֲבֻרָתוֹ נִרְפָּא לָנוּ׃

Transliteration:
hu mecholal mip'sha'einu meduka me'avonoteinu musar sh'lomenu alav uva'chavurato nirpa lanu.

Morphological and Syntactical Analysis
הוּא מְחֹלָל מִפְּשָׁעֵינוּ (hu mecholal mip'sha'einu):

מְחֹלָל (mecholal): This is a Pual participle, which is a passive form. The Pual stem often indicates an intensive or resultative action that is done to the subject. "He was pierced" shows the servant passively receiving the action of piercing.
מִפְּשָׁעֵינוּ (mip'sha'einu): This prepositional phrase means "because of our transgressions." It shows the reason for the passive suffering.
מְדֻכָּא מֵעֲוֹנוֹתֵינוּ (meduka me'avonoteinu):

מְדֻכָּא (meduka): This is a Pual participle, indicating the passive form of the verb "to crush." "He was crushed" again shows the servant passively enduring the action.
מֵעֲוֹנוֹתֵינוּ (me'avonoteinu): Another prepositional phrase meaning "because of our iniquities," providing the reason for the passive suffering.
מוּסַר שְׁלוֹמֵנוּ עָלָיו (musar sh'lomenu alav):

מוּסַר (musar): This is a noun meaning "chastisement" or "discipline."
שְׁלוֹמֵנוּ (sh'lomenu): This means "our peace."
עָלָיו (alav): This preposition means "upon him," showing that the chastisement that brings us peace is laid upon him, indicating a passive reception.
וּבַחֲבֻרָתוֹ נִרְפָּא לָנוּ (uva'chavurato nirpa lanu):

וּבַחֲבֻרָתוֹ (uva'chavurato): This means "and by his wounds" (or "stripes").
נִרְפָּא (nirpa): This is a Niphal verb form, which is also passive, meaning "we are healed."
לָנוּ (lanu): This means "for us."
Active and Passive Elements

Passive Elements: The use of Pual participles (מְחֹלָל, מְדֻכָּא) and the Niphal verb (נִרְפָּא) clearly shows that the suffering servant is subjected to actions (pierced, crushed, healed) without being the agent who initiates these actions. These grammatical forms indicate that the servant passively receives the suffering and punishment.

Active Elements: The broader context and syntax suggest an active acceptance. While the verbs are passive in form, indicating that the servant is subjected to these actions, the context of Isaiah 53 (especially verse 7, where the servant is described as not opening his mouth, like a lamb led to slaughter) implies a willing and active acceptance of these sufferings. The servant's passive reception of suffering is part of a divine plan actively accepted by the servant.


The grammatical, syntactical, and morphological analysis of Isaiah 53:5 reveals that the servant's suffering is described using passive forms, indicating that the actions are done to him. However, the broader context suggests an active willingness to undergo these sufferings, fulfilling a divine purpose. This combination of passive reception and active acceptance underscores the dual aspect of the suffering servant's role.

--for yourself-we may agree to disagree.
Johann.


2/2

 

[civic]

@Joe excellent posts in this thread brother. I always learn from your in depth studies on this topic. You as a former Calvinist know what you are talking about .

 

[Behold]

“You will indeed drink my cup,

Not a good translation.

Here is the clarity...>"Drink OF my Cup"..

See, the "Cup" that Jesus asked God to remove, was the wrath of God, being poured out on Jesus.. for the sin of the World, and only the SINLESS Sacrifice of God is worthy to receive that judgement "(Cup)".

So, no Apostle could have that "cup"as Jesus was the only one who could receive it.

That means that the method of Jesus's death, the crucifixion was coming to Peter, and not just to Peter.

 

[TomL]

Not a good translation.

Here is the clarity...>"Drink OF my Cup"..

See, the "Cup" that Jesus asked God to remove, was the wrath of God, being poured out on Jesus.. for the sin of the World, and only the SINLESS Sacrifice of God is worthy to receive that judgement "(Cup)".

So, no Apostle could have that "cup"as Jesus was the only one who could receive it.

That means that the method of Jesus's death, the crucifixion was coming to Peter, and not just to Peter.

Afraid not

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.”

Matthew 20:23 (ESV) — 23 He said to them, “You will drink my cup, but to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.”

Matthew 20:23 (LSB) — 23 He said to them, “My cup you shall drink; but to sit on My right and on My left, this is not Mine to give, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by My Father.”

Matthew 20:23 (NIV) — 23 Jesus said to them, “You will indeed drink from my cup, but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared by my Father.”

Matthew 20:23 (NASB 2020) — 23 He said to them, “My cup you shall drink; but to sit at My right and at My left is not Mine to give, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by My Father.”


And the cup was one of suffering

 

[Joe]

מוּסַר (musar): This is a noun meaning "chastisement" or "discipline."
שְׁלוֹמֵנוּ (sh'lomenu): This means "our peace."
עָלָיו (alav): This preposition means "upon him," showing that the chastisement that brings us peace is laid upon him, indicating a passive reception.
וּבַחֲבֻרָתוֹ נִרְפָּא לָנוּ (uva'chavurato nirpa lanu):

Punishment and chastisement are not the same in the Hebrew. I think you know this already, but in this reply by brightfame52 he conflates the two together using an English dictionary.

Please click here to a thread about מוּסָר mûsâr (moo-sawr).

Passive Elements: The use of Pual participles (מְחֹלָל, מְדֻכָּא) and the Niphal verb (נִרְפָּא) clearly shows that the suffering servant is subjected to actions (pierced, crushed, healed) without being the agent who initiates these actions. These grammatical forms indicate that the servant passively receives the suffering and punishment.

Active Elements: The broader context and syntax suggest an active acceptance. While the verbs are passive in form, indicating that the servant is subjected to these actions, the context of Isaiah 53 (especially verse 7, where the servant is described as not opening his mouth, like a lamb led to slaughter) implies a willing and active acceptance of these sufferings. The servant's passive reception of suffering is part of a divine plan actively accepted by the servant.

The grammatical, syntactical, and morphological analysis of Isaiah 53:5 reveals that the servant's suffering is described using passive forms, indicating that the actions are done to him. However, the broader context suggests an active willingness to undergo these sufferings, fulfilling a divine purpose. This combination of passive reception and active acceptance underscores the dual aspect of the suffering servant's role.

--for yourself-we may agree to disagree.
Johann.

2/2

I will begin by stating, I love Isaiah 53. It is one of the most detailed prophecies concerning God’s love in removing our sin to justify us.

When we read the bible as a whole, we understand the only punishment our Lord was receiving is at the hands of evil men under the power of Satan to serve the good plan of God. This is likened to the story of Joseph when he was acted upon evilly by his brothers, but ultimately God used it for all their good including the evil brothers and the Egyptians (Jews and Gentiles alike were saved from starvation).

And this is the same with our Lord. The Apostle Peter preached to the Jews during Pentecost and said, "Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death".

This means our Father foreknew what evil men were going to do beforehand and He did not intervene at any time, although He was with our Lord the whole time even on the cross. God used the intention of evil for good. And this is the same with Joseph, as he is an anti-type of Christ our Lord.

God foreknew Joseph's brothers were going to act evilly beforehand and did not stop it. The brothers acted evilly causing Joseph to ultimately suffer of no fault of his own and God did not intervene. One can see parallels between Joseph in the pit and his imprisonment by the Egyptians as our Lord's suffering and death that was not due him, and his release from prison and elevation to the right hand of Pharaoh as the resurrection and ascension of our Lord to the right hand of God. Joseph's story ended with God using him to save both Jews and Gentiles from a severe famine that would have killed them. And of course, our Lord's experience ends with God saving both Jews and Gentiles from sin that would have killed us.

Joseph said to his brothers, "But as for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, in order to bring it about as it is this day, to save many people alive. Now therefore, do not be afraid; I will provide for you and your little ones." And he comforted them and spoke kindly to them."
(Gen 50:20-21)

Could we not say that Joseph's rejection by his own brothers, the suffering they put him through, and his imprisonment that only happened because of his brother's evil actions that were at the good will of God is likened to our Lord's? Joseph received suffering that was not deserving, all according to the will of God for the good of many. And our Lord received suffering by His own people that was not deserving, all according to the will of God for the good of many.

God did indeed send His own Son into this world to be a sin offering; suffering death for the sins of the sinner, so that His sinless life purposely offered up unto death for our sins justifies us. The suffering He went through at the hands of evil men is detailed along with the reasoning; He died explicitly for the cause that our sin would be judged in His death all to the good and pleasing will of God.

The wages of sin have been paid in full as our sinless Lord took that payment on the cross for our sins. On the cross our Lord said it is finished. Sin has finally been effectively for all time put away-needing any future need to die for it, "He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself."...meaning, He has appeared to remove any future need to die for sin by offering Himself.

Our Lord, when speaking about being lifted up-crucified stated, "Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out." Upon His ascension, after His resurrection, Satan was cast out of Heaven, no longer having an audience before God to accuse us of sin. Rev 12:5-10.

Isaiah is not about God punishing His Son. It is about God willing His Son to receive the payment for our sins-death, to justify us once and for all, removing any future need to deal with it-it is finished, as sin was judged in the bodily death of Jesus Christ. The ledger has been reconciled, accounts have been settled, the death of Jesus Christ is applied to the account of everyone, and only those who believe will receive His death on their account, and Satan no longer has any ground to stand on accusing people of sin before God, for Jesus Christ has died for the sins of the entire world, everyone, and is now the Judge of all men.

All of this, "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son"!

May our Lord forever be praised!!!

God Bless

 

[TomL]

Then you have a problem that it pleased the Father to bruise Messiah, and to crush Him-is it in the Active Tense-or Passive?

Pleased because the father was then able to exhaust his wrath on someone or because

Isaiah 53:10–12 (KJV 1900) — 10 .............................................................................................. When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, He shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, And the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. 11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; For he shall bear their iniquities.

 

[Johann]

Pleased because the father was then able to exhaust his wrath on someone or because

Isaiah 53:10–12 (KJV 1900) — 10 .............................................................................................. When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, He shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, And the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. 11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; For he shall bear their iniquities.

"One verse theology" right here-not addressing my question @TomL --evasive, "passing through" to another thread and not responding to other members and their questions either.

Then you have a problem that it pleased the Father to bruise Messiah, and to crush Him-is it in the Active Tense-or Passive?

 

[civic]

"One verse theology" right here-not addressing my question @TomL --evasive, "passing through" to another thread and not responding to other members and their questions either.

Then you have a problem that it pleased the Father to bruise Messiah, and to crush Him-is it in the Active Tense-or Passive?

Where does the NT quote it ?

so much for your theology on PSA.

next

 

[civic]

Punishment and chastisement are not the same in the Hebrew. I think you know this already, but in this reply by brightfame52 he conflates the two together using an English dictionary.

Please click here to a thread about מוּסָר mûsâr (moo-sawr).


I will begin by stating, I love Isaiah 53. It is one of the most detailed prophecies concerning God’s love in removing our sin to justify us.

When we read the bible as a whole, we understand the only punishment our Lord was receiving is at the hands of evil men under the power of Satan to serve the good plan of God. This is likened to the story of Joseph when he was acted upon evilly by his brothers, but ultimately God used it for all their good including the evil brothers and the Egyptians (Jews and Gentiles alike were saved from starvation).

And this is the same with our Lord. The Apostle Peter preached to the Jews during Pentecost and said, "Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death".

This means our Father foreknew what evil men were going to do beforehand and He did not intervene at any time, although He was with our Lord the whole time even on the cross. God used the intention of evil for good. And this is the same with Joseph, as he is an anti-type of Christ our Lord.

God foreknew Joseph's brothers were going to act evilly beforehand and did not stop it. The brothers acted evilly causing Joseph to ultimately suffer of no fault of his own and God did not intervene. One can see parallels between Joseph in the pit and his imprisonment by the Egyptians as our Lord's suffering and death that was not due him, and his release from prison and elevation to the right hand of Pharaoh as the resurrection and ascension of our Lord to the right hand of God. Joseph's story ended with God using him to save both Jews and Gentiles from a severe famine that would have killed them. And of course, our Lord's experience ends with God saving both Jews and Gentiles from sin that would have killed us.

Joseph said to his brothers, "But as for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, in order to bring it about as it is this day, to save many people alive. Now therefore, do not be afraid; I will provide for you and your little ones." And he comforted them and spoke kindly to them."
(Gen 50:20-21)

Could we not say that Joseph's rejection by his own brothers, the suffering they put him through, and his imprisonment that only happened because of his brother's evil actions that were at the good will of God is likened to our Lord's? Joseph received suffering that was not deserving, all according to the will of God for the good of many. And our Lord received suffering by His own people that was not deserving, all according to the will of God for the good of many.

God did indeed send His own Son into this world to be a sin offering; suffering death for the sins of the sinner, so that His sinless life purposely offered up unto death for our sins justifies us. The suffering He went through at the hands of evil men is detailed along with the reasoning; He died explicitly for the cause that our sin would be judged in His death all to the good and pleasing will of God.

The wages of sin have been paid in full as our sinless Lord took that payment on the cross for our sins. On the cross our Lord said it is finished. Sin has finally been effectively for all time put away-needing any future need to die for it, "He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself."...meaning, He has appeared to remove any future need to die for sin by offering Himself.

Our Lord, when speaking about being lifted up-crucified stated, "Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out." Upon His ascension, after His resurrection, Satan was cast out of Heaven, no longer having an audience before God to accuse us of sin. Rev 12:5-10.

Isaiah is not about God punishing His Son. It is about God willing His Son to receive the payment for our sins-death, to justify us once and for all, removing any future need to deal with it-it is finished, as sin was judged in the bodily death of Jesus Christ. The ledger has been reconciled, accounts have been settled, the death of Jesus Christ is applied to the account of everyone, and only those who believe will receive His death on their account, and Satan no longer has any ground to stand on accusing people of sin before God, for Jesus Christ has died for the sins of the entire world, everyone, and is now the Judge of all men.

All of this, "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son"!

May our Lord forever be praised!!!

God Bless

Amen brother preach it !!!!!

 

[TomL]

"One verse theology" right here-not addressing my question @TomL --evasive, "passing through" to another thread and not responding to other members and their questions either.

Then you have a problem that it pleased the Father to bruise Messiah, and to crush Him-is it in the Active Tense-or Passive?

Um you did not answer the question

I affirmed it was the father's will to bruise him.

So i have no problem at all

The question was why

You ignored it

Was it because God was able to enjoy the opportunity to pour his wrath out on someone or was because by it Christ was providing for the healing of man.?

 

[civic]

Um you did not answer the question

I affirmed it was the father's will to bruise him.

So i have no problem at all

The question was why

You ignored it

Was it because God was able to enjoy the opportunity to pour his wrath out on someone or was because by it Christ was providing for the healing of man.?

Well done

 

[Johann]

I affirmed it was the father's will to bruise him.

Um you did not answer the question

I affirmed it was the father's will to bruise him.

So i have no problem at all

The question was why

You ignored it

Was it because God was able to enjoy the opportunity to pour his wrath out on someone or was because by it Christ was providing for the healing of man.?

You are not answering questions-just going from thread to thread.

 

[TomL]

You are not answering questions-just going from thread to thread.

You have not shown the verse requires PSA

I affirmed it was the father's will to bruise him.

The question was why

You ignored it

Was it because God was able to enjoy the opportunity to pour his wrath out on someone or was because by it Christ was providing for the healing of man.?

 

[civic]

You have not shown the verse requires PSA

I affirmed it was the father's will to bruise him.

The question was why

You ignored it

Was it because God was able to enjoy the opportunity to pour his wrath out on someone or was because by it Christ was providing for the healing of man.?

It’s because there are none. The entire NT is silent on the topic. The OT must get twisted to support the heresy known as PSA. Since there are only 2 passages in the entire Bible from the OT their false doctrine comes from

 

[TomL]

It’s because there are none. The entire NT is silent on the topic. The OT must get twisted to support the heresy known as PSA. Since there are only 2 passages in the entire Bible from the OT their false doctrine comes from

The idea God must be propitiated, that somehow God must be reconciled to man is contrary to scripture

 

[civic]

The idea God must be propitiated, that somehow God must be reconciled to man is contrary to scripture

Yes it’s foreign to scripture and originated from paganism, Greek philosophy and the gnostics. Thank Augustine the heretic for bringing his heresies into the church. A real wolf in sheep’s clothing

 

[TomL]

Yes it’s foreign to scripture and originated from paganism, Greek philosophy and the gnostics. Thank Augustine the heretic for bringing his heresies into the church. A real wolf in sheep’s clothing

Yep the western church was infected by his doctrine