Why Substitutionary Atonement?

[ToBeLoved]

It doesn't, but I asked anyway. I have found rather that there is substitution in the atonement, especially seeing as Jesus is our advocate before God, then God's displeasure/shame due to our sin is borne upon Jesus' reputation/honour/glory/pride, and when we are disobedient we also make it difficult for Him to fulfil His objectives.

Seeing that so much of His task is entrusted to us as Christian disciples, really the sacrifice demonstrates that in giving up His life on behalf of His friends that we have become the substitute for Him (2 Corinthians 10:3-6). Whereas He was able to walk and talk the truth perfectly on earth (that is the reason that He was sent as Messiah - to redeem the world and establish the everlasting kingdom of God that would complete God's plan: John 15:22, Matthew 21:37); by His sacrifice though, He has been substituted by faulty humans of sinful origin who are prone to make quite bad mistakes (Matthew 24:48-49, John 12:35, Luke 19:14).

But Christ KNOWS that we are faulty humans. And Christ knows that we will make mistakes. That is all part of the plan.

It is not a mistake, but was always intended to be this way.

When we sin and fall or do not make use of the opportunities Christ has given us, we are to repent and then He provides us with more opportunities. This is as much (spreading the gospel and sharing Jesus) a part of our sanctification as it is the person hearing what we are sharing. Both work for the glory of God.

 

[ToBeLoved]

I hope that we can get past these PSA beliefs and just talk about Christ and His substitutionary atonement according to the Word of God.

 

[oi_antz]

But Christ KNOWS that we are faulty humans. And Christ knows that we will make mistakes. That is all part of the plan.

That's really the biggest sacrifice, IMO. He could well have brought forth Armageddon to the garden of Gethsemane (Matthew 26:53), but then Matthew 13:29 shows that it would have caused some loss of the potential harvest.

It is not a mistake, but was always intended to be this way.

This word "It" that I have underlined - what did you mean for that to refer to?

When we sin and fall or do not make use of the opportunities Christ has given us, we are to repent and then He provides us with more opportunities. This is as much (spreading the gospel and sharing Jesus) a part of our sanctification as it is the person hearing what we are sharing. Both work for the glory of God.

Ok, thank you for saying that. Do you think that He would always provide more opportunities or is it at His sole discretion?

 

[oi_antz]

I hope that we can get past these PSA beliefs and just talk about Christ and His substitutionary atonement according to the Word of God.

Do you know of any scripture that supports a view that "God's wrath was satisfied by Jesus' death on the cross"?

 

[razzelflabben]

Do you know of any scripture that supports a view that "God's wrath was satisfied by Jesus' death on the cross"?

John 3:36

 

[oi_antz]

John 3:36

Thanks. But this says that God's wrath is satisfied by our obedience. I am requesting scripture that states His wrath was satisfied by Jesus' suffering.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Thanks. But this says that God's wrath is satisfied by our obedience. I am requesting scripture that states His wrath was satisfied by Jesus' suffering.

No it does not. Read it again.

 

[oi_antz]

No it does not. Read it again.

Totally true and astute, thank you!

 

[razzelflabben]

Thanks. But this says that God's wrath is satisfied by our obedience. I am requesting scripture that states His wrath was satisfied by Jesus' suffering.

John 3:36...
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on them.

First notice it does NOT say obedience, but rather belief..now, what does belief have to do with it? Because it is not our obedience but Jesus blood applied through our belief, you know, faith...iow's Jesus blood....here is some more passages that all say the same thing http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Bible-Verses-About-Atonement/

Please also notice that in order to make your claim you needed to change what John 3:36 says, which makes it your claim not God's....

 

[ToBeLoved]

Thanks. But this says that God's wrath is satisfied by our obedience. I am requesting scripture that states His wrath was satisfied by Jesus' suffering.

How could Jesus make us righteous through Justification if the Father's wrath was not satisfied by Jesus sacrifice.

The other thing is the ressurection. Jesus was resurrected by the Father. That was the evidence.

 

[hedrick]

John 3:36...
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on them.

First notice it does NOT say obedience, but rather belief..now, what does belief have to do with it? Because it is not our obedience but Jesus blood applied through our belief, you know, faith...iow's Jesus blood....here is some more passages that all say the same thing http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Bible-Verses-About-Atonement/

First, not sure what translation you’re using, but the second half is whoever disobeys the son. (Word commentary says that there’s a tradition going back to the Latin to understand it as refuses to believe, but that’s not the basic meaning.)

So we have faith (the word in the first half is literally “the faithful one”) opposed to disobedience. What’s up? I would claim that in the portions of the NT that emphasize faith (John and Paul) the overall position is that we are justified by faith but judged by our actions, i.e. that it is assumed that faith will always be shown in actions. Indeed the words translated faith can also mean faithful or obedient.

Brown’s commentary (Anchor Bible) points to 3:18-21, which connects faith with obedience: those who do evil don’t come to the light, lest their evil be exposed.

It’s not clear to me, however, what this passage has to do with penal substitution. It says that those who trust or are faithful to Christ have eternal life, but it doesn’t say just how Christ’s death is involved in that.

 

[hedrick]

How could Jesus make us righteous through Justification if the Father's wrath was not satisfied by Jesus sacrifice.

That’s the question of the atonement. This is only one of several ideas, and it’s not the most ancient.

At the beginning of Rom 6, Paul says in baptism we die with Christ, and that frees us from our sins, because whoever has died is freed from sin. There’s no implication that God needs punishment. Death frees us from our old life of sin and death, and rising with him brings us to new life.

I also like Calvin’s explanation: Through union with Christ in faith, Christ’s obedience transforms us.

Both of these explanations see the atonement as acting by making a change in us. Of course the change isn’t complete in this life, as Paul makes quite clear. It's a change in basic orientation. Justification recognizes this. It says that God accepts us based on the fact that we are Christ's, even though we don't merit salvation.

This is consistent with the OT, in which the prophets assure us that what God wants to accept people is repentance, not sacrifice. I've always felt that sacrifice was basically a sacrament, a formal sign of repentance.

 

[razzelflabben]

First, not sure what translation you’re using, but the second half is whoever disobeys the son. (Word commentary says that there’s a tradition going back to the Latin to understand it as refuses to believe, but that’s not the basic meaning.)

let me point out to you that belief, that is true belief with the heart, leads to obedience not the other way around.

So we have faith (the word in the first half is literally “the faithful one”) opposed to disobedience. What’s up? I would claim that in the portions of the NT that emphasize faith (John and Paul) the overall position is that we are justified by faith but judged by our actions, i.e. that it is assumed that faith will always be shown in actions. Indeed the words translated faith can also mean faithful or obedient.

actually faith means to trust....but that would be to digress off the topic at hand, now wouldn't it?

Brown’s commentary (Anchor Bible) points to 3:18-21, which connects faith with obedience: those who do evil don’t come to the light, lest their evil be exposed.

It’s not clear to me, however, what this passage has to do with penal substitution. It says that those who trust or are faithful to Christ have eternal life, but it doesn’t say just how Christ’s death is involved in that.

wow, really? So the last half of the verse is just thrown away on this topic? Why? and what of all the other passages I posted that support the position? We can also look at Isaiah 53 and dozens more....maybe substitutionary means something different to you than it does to me...care to define it for us?

 

[ToBeLoved]

That’s the question of the atonement. This is only one of several ideas, and it’s not the most ancient.

At the beginning of Rom 6, Paul says in baptism we die with Christ, and that frees us from our sins, because whoever has died is freed from sin. There’s no implication that God needs punishment. Death frees us from our old life of sin and death, and rising with him brings us to new life.

I also like Calvin’s explanation: Through union with Christ in faith, Christ’s obedience transforms us.

Both of these explanations see the atonement as acting by making a change in us. Of course the change isn’t complete in this life, as Paul makes quite clear. It's a change in basic orientation. Justification recognizes this. It says that God accepts us based on the fact that we are Christ's, even though we don't merit salvation.

This is consistent with the OT, in which the prophets assure us that what God wants to accept people is repentance, not sacrifice. I've always felt that sacrifice was basically a sacrament, a formal sign of repentance.

However, the Word tells us that the consequence of sin is death. We did not pay that death to sin. Jesus did.

So are you questioning the need for atonement in Christ all together? I'm not totally understanding what the point is of this post.

 

[oi_antz]

John 3:36...
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on them.

First notice it does NOT say obedience, but rather belief..now, what does belief have to do with it? Because it is not our obedience but Jesus blood applied through our belief, you know, faith...iow's Jesus blood....here is some more passages that all say the same thing http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Bible-Verses-About-Atonement/

Please also notice that in order to make your claim you needed to change what John 3:36 says, which makes it your claim not God's....

None of those verses necessarily imply that God's wrath was expressed upon Jesus. Can you please explain why you are viewing these verses in support of this idea?

 

[razzelflabben]

That’s the question of the atonement. This is only one of several ideas, and it’s not the most ancient.

At the beginning of Rom 6, Paul says in baptism we die with Christ, and that frees us from our sins, because whoever has died is freed from sin. There’s no implication that God needs punishment. Death frees us from our old life of sin and death, and rising with him brings us to new life.

wait a moment....hold the presses...what does punishment have to do with any of this? Wrath and punishment are not the same thing, so apparently we are talking about two completely different things here if you think that wrath and punishment are the same thing. Once we reconcile this difference, maybe you will start making more sense to me.

I also like Calvin’s explanation: Through union with Christ in faith, Christ’s obedience transforms us.

not a clue...faith produces obedience not obedience faith....you lost me on this one, what does obedience have to do with anything when the John passage being discussed says faith/belief and not obedience.

Both of these explanations see the atonement as acting by making a change in us. Of course the change isn’t complete in this life, as Paul makes quite clear. It's a change in basic orientation. Justification recognizes this. It says that God accepts us based on the fact that we are Christ's, even though we don't merit salvation.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand, you seem to be arguing for Christ's blood is our atonement rather than against it like you are claiming when disagreeing with us.

This is consistent with the OT, in which the prophets assure us that what God wants to accept people is repentance, not sacrifice. I've always felt that sacrifice was basically a sacrament, a formal sign of repentance.

huh? You are really getting me confused, I can't follow which side you are on, much less what sacrifice has to do with this discussion. Jesus as High Priest offered both sacrifice and offerings, it's what all high priests offered. I don't know, somehow I am totally missing your point apparently.

 

[razzelflabben]

None of those verses necessarily imply that God's wrath was expressed upon Jesus. Can you please explain why you are viewing these verses in support of this idea?

Okay, now I'm getting confused again...Jesus blood is the atonement for God's wrath....iow's it satisfies God's wrath...you want me to somehow support the notion that God put HIs wrath on Jesus....why would I do that and what makes you think that an atonement means that wrath was applied rather than satisfied? I really am not following your issue here.

Further evidence of what I am saying (not what you want me to say) is Christ's words on the cross, "My God My God why have You forsaken Me?" Those words alone testify to Jesus being our atonement for God's wrath. You know, separation from God....aka spiritual death.

 

[oi_antz]

How could Jesus make us righteous through Justification if the Father's wrath was not satisfied by Jesus sacrifice.

I think you have made an unjustified assumption that God's wrath due to our sins needs to be satisfied in order for us to be justified by faith. I do not see that as a necessary logical construct. So I will answer your question with Hebrews 10:26-29, and especially Hebrews 10:18, which shows how a Christian spirit provides a resolution to repent that is real and that no animal sacrifice could ever have done. As for God's wrath being satisfied, I even think it is not necessarily right to assume that it ever is or can be. But, we can probably agree that He is so perfect in love that He can guard us from it because it would please Him most. Maybe we can say that forgiveness is a gift of grace.

The other thing is the ressurection. Jesus was resurrected by the Father. That was the evidence.

I think this is off-topic, but it's not a matter in dispute here, unless I have not understood the context for this.

 

[oi_antz]

Okay, now I'm getting confused again...Jesus blood is the atonement for God's wrath....iow's it satisfies God's wrath...you want me to somehow support the notion that God put HIs wrath on Jesus....why would I do that and what makes you think that an atonement means that wrath was applied rather than satisfied? I really am not following your issue here.

Further evidence of what I am saying (not what you want me to say) is Christ's words on the cross, "My God My God why have You forsaken Me?" Those words alone testify to Jesus being our atonement for God's wrath. You know, separation from God....aka spiritual death.

Have you ever considered that God withdrew from Jesus at that time because it was too painful to bear?

 

[oi_antz]

Okay, now I'm getting confused again...Jesus blood is the atonement for God's wrath....iow's it satisfies God's wrath...you want me to somehow support the notion that God put HIs wrath on Jesus....why would I do that and what makes you think that an atonement means that wrath was applied rather than satisfied? I really am not following your issue here.

Can you please explain why you are using the word "wrath" this way? No scriptures that you have presented have done this either. I see this as contributing to confusion while you and I might otherwise agree. I also suspect you and I may not agree on the purpose or intention of death as applied in Genesis 3:22 and Romans 6:23.