• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

PSA, an essential Christian doctrine.

Do you agree Jesus endured the Father's wrath in the place of the elect.

  • Yes

  • No

  • I'm not sure but it is something I'm interested in studying.

  • It's not important.

  • I've never hearof it.


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.

ladodgers6

Know what you believe and why you believe it
Site Supporter
Oct 6, 2015
2,324
791
Los Angeles
✟251,002.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
This doctrine of PSA - Penal substitutionary atonement, I believe is an essential doctrine to Christianity. I believe firmly this is a doctrine taught throughout scripture. I am also aware there are those out there who do agree with some aspects of PSA, mainly, they disagree that Jesus endured the wrath of the Father. If one loses this truth, you lose the gospel.

I believe these couple of verses may be a good place to start.
Psalm 22:1
My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?
Far from my help are the words of my groaning.


Matthew 26:39,
And He went a little beyond them, and fell on His face and prayed, saying, “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; yet not as I will, but as You will.”
Eusebius Caesarea AD 314 he became the bishop of Caesarea Maritima in the Roman province of Syria Palaestina. He wrote a lesser-known book, The Proof of the Gospel.

At one point, he takes great pains to lay out the curses of the Mosaic law and the penalties it required. Sin always demands a penalty. Quoting from Isaiah 53:5 (“he was pierced for our transgressions”), Eusebius argues:

“In this he shows that Christ, being apart from all sin, will receive the sins of men on himself. And therefore he will suffer the penalty of sinners, and will be pained on their behalf; and not on his own” (Proof of the Gospel, 3.2). (Excerpt from his book)

Here is the essence of penal substitution—Jesus took our penalty on himself so that we might be spared God’s wrath. Many scholars have failed to see the explicit connection between the atonement and penalty in the early church, and yet here is a clear example. Throughout Eusebius’s work, penalty is mentioned several times as it relates to Christ bearing the punishment we deserved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clare73
Upvote 0

ladodgers6

Know what you believe and why you believe it
Site Supporter
Oct 6, 2015
2,324
791
Los Angeles
✟251,002.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
This doctrine of PSA - Penal substitutionary atonement, I believe is an essential doctrine to Christianity. I believe firmly this is a doctrine taught throughout scripture. I am also aware there are those out there who do agree with some aspects of PSA, mainly, they disagree that Jesus endured the wrath of the Father. If one loses this truth, you lose the gospel.

I believe these couple of verses may be a good place to start.
Psalm 22:1
My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?
Far from my help are the words of my groaning.


Matthew 26:39,
And He went a little beyond them, and fell on His face and prayed, saying, “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; yet not as I will, but as You will.”
Here's another great resource:

Epistle to Diognetus​

The crown jewel of penal substitution in the early church is found in the second-century apologetic work called the Epistle to Diognetus. Although lengthy, this paragraph is the single best description of penal substitution in the first few centuries, and quite possibly in the history of the church:

In his mercy he took upon himself our sins; he himself gave up his own Son as a ransom for us, the holy one for the lawless, the guiltless for the guilty, the just for the unjust, the incorruptible for the corruptible, the immortal for the mortal. For what else but his righteousness could have covered our sins? In whom was it possible for us, the lawless and ungodly, to be justified, except in the Son of God alone? O the sweet exchange, O the incomprehensible work of God, O the unexpected blessings, that the sinfulness of many should be hidden in one righteous person, while the righteousness of one should justify many sinners! (Epistle to Diognetus, 9.2–5).

“O sweet exchange!” Christ for us! Jesus took on our sins because he was holy, guiltless, just, incorruptible, and immortal, whereas we are lawless, guilty, unjust, corruptible, and mortal. We needed to hide our sins in him and to receive his righteousness, a beautiful expression of double imputation (our sins to Jesus; his righteousness to us). But notice, too, that he mentions Christ as our ransom. In this one passage, several hues of the atonement are present.​
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clare73
Upvote 0

ozso

Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
26,105
14,439
63
PNW
✟916,572.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Eusebius Caesarea AD 314 he became the bishop of Caesarea Maritima in the Roman province of Syria Palaestina. He wrote a lesser-known book, The Proof of the Gospel.

At one point, he takes great pains to lay out the curses of the Mosaic law and the penalties it required. Sin always demands a penalty. Quoting from Isaiah 53:5 (“he was pierced for our transgressions”), Eusebius argues:

“In this he shows that Christ, being apart from all sin, will receive the sins of men on himself. And therefore he will suffer the penalty of sinners, and will be pained on their behalf; and not on his own” (Proof of the Gospel, 3.2). (Excerpt from his book)

Here is the essence of penal substitution—Jesus took our penalty on himself so that we might be spared God’s wrath. Many scholars have failed to see the explicit connection between the atonement and penalty in the early church, and yet here is a clear example. Throughout Eusebius’s work, penalty is mentioned several times as it relates to Christ bearing the punishment we deserved.
The result of sin is death (Genesis 2:17, Romans 6:23 etc) and Christ died for our sins (1 Corinthians 15:3) and it appears that's what Eusebius was talking about. Also Eusebius was a "Father of Church History", not to be confused with the title of Church Father.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jesus is YHWH
Upvote 0

ozso

Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
26,105
14,439
63
PNW
✟916,572.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Here's another great resource:

Epistle to Diognetus​

The crown jewel of penal substitution in the early church is found in the second-century apologetic work called the Epistle to Diognetus. Although lengthy, this paragraph is the single best description of penal substitution in the first few centuries, and quite possibly in the history of the church:​
It's unknown who even wrote that. And it certainly does not establish PSA as universal church doctrine for first few centuries.
 
Upvote 0

ladodgers6

Know what you believe and why you believe it
Site Supporter
Oct 6, 2015
2,324
791
Los Angeles
✟251,002.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
The result of sin is death (Genesis 2:17, Romans 6:23 etc) and Christ died for our sins (1 Corinthians 15:3) and it appears that's what Eusebius was talking about. Also Eusebius was a "Father of Church History", not to be confused with the title of Church Father.
Well, that's not the case at all. Here's why if death is all that happens; just total darkness, nothingness. Then why fear death? I can live as I see fit, enjoy every sinful pleasure, live it up, before my final hoorah, right? And if death is the only result of sin, then why did Jesus go through all that suffering for his people? But there is a judgement day coming, where the fire is never quenched and the worm never dies, there will gnashing of teeth.

Christ experienced the following: stricken, smitten, afflicted, pierced, crushed, slaughtered, Oppressed, grieved. Christ was punish as clear as these passages depict.

And this passage puts this argument to bed.

5 But he was pierced for our transgressions;
he was crushed for our iniquities;
upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace,
and with his wounds we are healed.​
 
Upvote 0

ozso

Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
26,105
14,439
63
PNW
✟916,572.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Well, that's not the case at all. Here's why if death is all that happens; just total darkness, nothingness. Then why fear death? I can live as I see fit, enjoy every sinful pleasure, live it up, before my final hoorah, right? And if death is the only result of sin, then why did Jesus go through all that suffering for his people? But there is a judgement day coming, where the fire is never quenched and the worm never dies, there will gnashing of teeth.

Christ experienced the following: stricken, smitten, afflicted, pierced, crushed, slaughtered, Oppressed, grieved. Christ was punish as clear as these passages depict.

And this passage puts this argument to bed.

5 But he was pierced for our transgressions;
he was crushed for our iniquities;
upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace,
and with his wounds we are healed.​
God's punishment of Hell for sin comes after the death that sin results in. But the Father didn't punish Christ in hell after he died. It can be said that scripture indicates that Christ did actually spend time in hell between His death and resurrection (Ephesians 4:9, 1 Peter 4:6). But it certainly does not indicate that Jesus received punishment from the Father while in Hell.

And before His death Christ suffered at the hands of man. Or are we supposed to believe it was the Father who smashed a crown of thorns into Jesus' head, and then slapped, punched and spit on Jesus, and then savagely whipped him, and then pounded nails into his flesh though the hands of Roman soldiers? Because I don't see how we can say the Father punished Jesus without saying that.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jesus is YHWH
Upvote 0

Jesus is YHWH

my Lord and my God !
Site Supporter
Dec 15, 2011
3,496
1,727
✟389,997.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Eusebius Caesarea AD 314 he became the bishop of Caesarea Maritima in the Roman province of Syria Palaestina. He wrote a lesser-known book, The Proof of the Gospel.

At one point, he takes great pains to lay out the curses of the Mosaic law and the penalties it required. Sin always demands a penalty. Quoting from Isaiah 53:5 (“he was pierced for our transgressions”), Eusebius argues:

“In this he shows that Christ, being apart from all sin, will receive the sins of men on himself. And therefore he will suffer the penalty of sinners, and will be pained on their behalf; and not on his own” (Proof of the Gospel, 3.2). (Excerpt from his book)

Here is the essence of penal substitution—Jesus took our penalty on himself so that we might be spared God’s wrath. Many scholars have failed to see the explicit connection between the atonement and penalty in the early church, and yet here is a clear example. Throughout Eusebius’s work, penalty is mentioned several times as it relates to Christ bearing the punishment we deserved.
Not a single one mentioned Gods wrath from the Father to the Son. Not a single quote talked about the Father turning His back on the Son and being separated from the Father because of sin.

Nice try though.
 
Upvote 0

Jesus is YHWH

my Lord and my God !
Site Supporter
Dec 15, 2011
3,496
1,727
✟389,997.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
God's punishment of Hell for sin comes after the death that sin results in. But the Father didn't punish Christ in hell after he died. I can be said that scripture indicates that Christ did actually spend time in hell between His death and resurrection (Ephesians 4:9, 1 Peter 4:6). But it certainly does not indicate that Jesus received punishment from the Father while in Hell.

And before His death Christ suffered at the hands of man. Or are we supposed to believe it was the Father who smashed a crown of thorns into Jesus' head, and then slapped, punched and spit on Jesus, and then savagely whipped him, and then pounded nails into his flesh though the hands of Roman soldiers? Because I don't see how we can say the Father punished Jesus without saying that.
Correct and as PSA teaches that God the Father killed the Son we see Scripture once again proves the theory is unbiblical.


Acts 2:23
This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross

Acts 4:10,11
Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole…

Acts 5:30
The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

Acts 7:52
Was there ever a prophet your ancestors did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him

Acts 13:27
For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him

1 Corinthians 2:8-
None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Jesus is YHWH

my Lord and my God !
Site Supporter
Dec 15, 2011
3,496
1,727
✟389,997.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Well, that's not the case at all. Here's why if death is all that happens; just total darkness, nothingness. Then why fear death? I can live as I see fit, enjoy every sinful pleasure, live it up, before my final hoorah, right? And if death is the only result of sin, then why did Jesus go through all that suffering for his people? But there is a judgement day coming, where the fire is never quenched and the worm never dies, there will gnashing of teeth.

Christ experienced the following: stricken, smitten, afflicted, pierced, crushed, slaughtered, Oppressed, grieved. Christ was punish as clear as these passages depict.

And this passage puts this argument to bed.

5 But he was pierced for our transgressions;
he was crushed for our iniquities;
upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace,
and with his wounds we are healed.​
all done by man

next
 
  • Like
Reactions: ozso
Upvote 0

Jesus is YHWH

my Lord and my God !
Site Supporter
Dec 15, 2011
3,496
1,727
✟389,997.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The result of sin is death (Genesis 2:17, Romans 6:23 etc) and Christ died for our sins (1 Corinthians 15:3) and it appears that's what Eusebius was talking about. Also Eusebius was a "Father of Church History", not to be confused with the title of Church Father.
Exactly its called equivocating.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ozso
Upvote 0

Jesus is YHWH

my Lord and my God !
Site Supporter
Dec 15, 2011
3,496
1,727
✟389,997.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Eusebius Caesarea AD 314 he became the bishop of Caesarea Maritima in the Roman province of Syria Palaestina. He wrote a lesser-known book, The Proof of the Gospel.

At one point, he takes great pains to lay out the curses of the Mosaic law and the penalties it required. Sin always demands a penalty. Quoting from Isaiah 53:5 (“he was pierced for our transgressions”), Eusebius argues:

“In this he shows that Christ, being apart from all sin, will receive the sins of men on himself. And therefore he will suffer the penalty of sinners, and will be pained on their behalf; and not on his own” (Proof of the Gospel, 3.2). (Excerpt from his book)

Here is the essence of penal substitution—Jesus took our penalty on himself so that we might be spared God’s wrath. Many scholars have failed to see the explicit connection between the atonement and penalty in the early church, and yet here is a clear example. Throughout Eusebius’s work, penalty is mentioned several times as it relates to Christ bearing the punishment we deserved.
Wrath from God is not required for the forgiveness of sins, that is a misnomer. It is a man made doctrine. Wrath means anger, retribution, vengeance.

Exodus 34:6

Then the LORD passed by in front of him and proclaimed, “The LORD, the LORD God, compassionate and merciful, slow to anger, and abounding in faithfulness and truth;

Isaiah 48:9
For the sake of My name I will delay My wrath; for the sake of My praise I will restrain it, so that you will not be cut off.

Psalm 78:38
And yet He was compassionate; He forgave their iniquity and did not destroy them. He often restrained His anger and did not unleash His full wrath.

Psalm 85:1-3
You, Lord, showed favor to your land;
you restored the fortunes of Jacob.
2 You forgave the iniquity of your people
and covered all their sins.
3 You set aside all your wrath
and turned from your fierce anger.




The wrath of God (Isaiah 53)

Within the study of the doctrine on PSA, the central O.T. passage it comes from is found in Isaiah 53. Let us look at how the N.T. quotes Isaiah 53 and see how the N.T. writers viewed the passages and used them in the N.T. and what language from Isaiah 53 they applied to Jesus in the N.T. regarding suffering.

In doing so, a few things stand out. There is no penal aspect/ language Isaiah used that is carried over in the N.T. but that of substitution. Isaiah 53:4- WE (not God) considered Him punished by God. The following NT passages quote Isaiah 53: Matthew 8:14-17; Mark 15:27-32; John 12:37-41; Luke 22:35-38; Acts 8:26-35; Romans 10:11-21; and 1 Peter 2:19-25. Not one of them uses any penal language where PSA gets its doctrine from in Isaiah 53 in the New Testament.

Atonement- katallagé καταλλαγή -reconciliation, restoration to favor. Strongs 2643.

Thayers: adjustment of a difference, reconciliation, restoration to favor, (from Aeschylus on); in the N. T., of the restoration of the favor of God to sinners that repent and put their trust in the expiatory death of Christ: 2 Corinthians 5:18f; with the genitive of the one received into favor, τοῦ κόσμου (opposed to ἀποβολή), Romans 11:15; καταλλαγήν ἐλάβομεν, we received the blessing of the recovered favor of God, Romans 5:11; with the genitive of him whose favor is recovered, 2 Macc. 5:20. (Cf. Trench, § lxxvii.)

Romans 5:11- And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement. KJV

Romans 5:11- And not only this, but we also exult in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation. NASB

1 Corinthians 5:7 say the following: For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. This means just like the firstborn were spared by the blood on the posts of their doors from God’s wrath so to are we passed over Gods wrath from the blood of Jesus. The blood of Jesus provides forgiveness of sins and God’s wrath like with the Israelites are passed over and it falls upon the wicked, not those covered and protected by the blood of the Lamb. Gods’ wrath as Romans 1 declares is still being poured out upon sin and ungodliness and the bowls of Gods wrath and punishment is still yet to come. So, if Jesus bore Gods’ wrath for sinners, then why is God’s wrath still being poured out now and in the future if in the Atonement Gods wrath was satisfied? The fact is Jesus did not bear God’s wrath on the cross because it still exists and is being poured out in the bowls of Revelation before His 2nd Coming.

Romans 1:18- The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness

Romans 5:9- Therefore, since we have now been justified by His blood, how much more shall we be saved from wrath through Him!

Colossians 3:6-Because of these, the wrath of God is coming on the sons of disobedience.

Ephesians 5:6- Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things the wrath of God is coming on the sons of disobedience

Thessalonians 1:10- and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.

Propitiation- the turning away of God's anger/wrath

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.

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

Purification for sin- καθαρισμός- katharismos: a cleansing, purifying, purification, expiation. Strongs 2512.

Thayers: a cleansing from the guilt of sins (see καθαρίζω, 1 b. β.): wrought now by baptism, 2 Peter 1:9, now by the expiatory sacrifice of Christ, Hebrews 1:3 on which cf. Kurtz, Commentary, p. 70; (Exodus 30:10; τῆς ἁμαρτίας μου, Job 7:21; of an atonement, Lucian, asin. 22)

Hebrews 1:3-And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high;


Purification for sin is in the blood of Christ in the Atonement


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 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, His life which was given for our sins. Forgiveness is only found in His blood that He gave His life 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. The entire book of Hebrews is built upon the OT Law and how it is fulfilled in Christ.

Jesus said He gave His life as a Ransom . Strongs 3038- Lutron λύτρον. the purchasing money for manumitting slaves, a ransom, the price of ransoming; especially the sacrifice by which expiation is effected, an offering of expiation. Thayers: λύτρον, λύτρου, τό (λύω), the Sept. passim for כֹּפֶר, גְּאֻלָּה, פִּדְיון, etc.; the price for redeeming, ransom (paid for slaves, Leviticus 19:20; for captives, Isaiah 45:13; for the ransom of a life, Exodus 21:30; Numbers 35:31f): ἀντί πολλῶν, to liberate many from the misery and penalty of their sins, Matthew 20:28; Mark 10:45. (Pindar, Aeschylus, Xenophon, Plato, others.)


Matthew 20:28- just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many

As we read in Scripture Gods wrath never falls on the Righteous but the sinner in rebellion against God, the reprobate, the wicked. Not one passage in Scripture declares Gods wrath fell on the Son. Its a myth, a fable.

hope this helps !!!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
28,104
7,222
North Carolina
✟331,096.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
PSA came from him
PSA came from the OT sacrificial system, which was the pattern/type for NT atonement (post #16).
PSA has been here since the beginning of sacrificial atonement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Foghorn
Upvote 0

Jesus is YHWH

my Lord and my God !
Site Supporter
Dec 15, 2011
3,496
1,727
✟389,997.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
PSA came from the OT sacrificial system, which was the pattern/type of NT atonement (post #16).
PSA has been here since the beginning of sacrificial atonement.
Brother I believed that as well for 40 years. PSA the doctrine did not exist until the reformation.

I have dialogued with some calvinists who do not adhere to the wrath from Father to Son and the separation of the Father/Son relationship.
 
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
28,104
7,222
North Carolina
✟331,096.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Where does scripture imply it’s essential ? And are you claiming anyone who believes the other 6 theories are not saved ?
Atonement accomplishes all the theories.

However, the OT sacrifices are its pattern.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jesus is YHWH
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
28,104
7,222
North Carolina
✟331,096.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I'd love to see you post early church fathers actually teaching penal substitutionary atonement. Not in the form of cherry picked single sentences that sounds like it, but an obvious clear teaching of it.
It doesn't come from the ECF's, it comes from the OT sacrificial system, which was the pattern/type for NT atonement (see post #16).
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Mark Quayle
Upvote 0

Jesus is YHWH

my Lord and my God !
Site Supporter
Dec 15, 2011
3,496
1,727
✟389,997.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
It doesn't come from the ECF's, it comes from the OT sacrificial system, which was the pattern/type for NT atonement (see post #16).
I understand your position and when I have had to defend the Trinity against those who reject it because of the creeds are not inspired like you I defend it from Scripture apart from any definition that came by the creeds.
 
Upvote 0

ozso

Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
26,105
14,439
63
PNW
✟916,572.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.