The Error of Penal Substitution
Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 11:42 am
An article on the atonement. What do you think?
---------- Forwarded message ----------
The Error of Penal Substitution: Jesus Did Not Die in My Place
By Bob Myhan
Penal Substitution is that theory of the atonement that says that God demands the payment of the penalty for sin by a substitute in order to remain just while justifying man. In other words, God cannot justly forgive man unless the punishment for sin is suffered by a substitute for man. And, according to the theory, Jesus is that substitute. He died in your place and in mine that you and I might be justified (or forgiven) and God might remain just.
It seems to this writer that, if the theory were true, either Calvinism or Universalism would follow because salvation would then be unconditional.
Calvinism posits that all humans are born totally and hereditarily depraved, that God unconditionally elected certain individuals to salvation, that the atonement was limited to the elect and that all the elect will persevere to the end. Universalism holds that, since Jesus died for all, all will be saved. Both affirm that all those for whom Jesus died will be saved because their sins were punished in the person of Jesus. However, Jesus was not a substitute but a sacrifice.
What one is willing to sacrifice for a person or cause is an indicator of the love he has for that person or cause. The life of a living thing is in the blood thereof (Lev. 17:11). Therefore, to shed the blood of a living thing is to sacrifice the life thereof. The sacrifice of Jesus’ life was the ultimate demonstration of the love of God (Rom. 5:1-11; 8:31-39; John 3:16) and of Christ (John 15:13; 1 John 3:16) for humankind.
If the Son of God had come into the world immediately after the sin of Adam and Eve, there is no way anyone could ever have appreciated the love of God. And one could hardly reciprocate a love that he does not appreciate. For this reason, God incorporated the idea of sacrifice into religion so that, in the fullness of time, His love could be demonstrated—through the sacrifice of His Son—so that man could appreciate it and would be motivated to reciprocate it.
The Old Testament was taken out of the way and the New Testament was dedicated by the pouring out of Christ’s blood and the sacrifice of His life (Col. 2:14; Heb. 10:1-10; 9:16-18).
The shedding of Jesus’ blood in His death on the cross also reveals “the goodness of God” that “leads you to repentance” (Rom. 2:3-4), it provides a focal point for man’s faith in God and in His Son (Rom. 3:21-26) and only the shedding of the precious blood of Jesus the Lamb could demonstrate the magnitude of sin (Rom. 8:1-4).
Some who are neither Calvinists nor Universalists also hold this theory but these seem to this writer to be inconsistent. If Jesus was punished for the sins of anyone, then those for whose sins He was punished will not be punished. Nor would they need forgiveness. Furthermore, eternal security would then be unconditional. If this is not the case, why is it not?
Therefore, Jesus did not die in my place or yours. It was His place and His alone, to die on that cross. He died on the cross, not as punishment but as a sacrifice for sin. He did this that we might realize both the enormity of sin and the magnitude of His love and His Father’s love for us and that we might be motivated to love them in return.
Yes, we were “redeemed by the blood of the Lamb” but only in the sense that His blood purchased our release from sin by providing the conditions of our forgiveness.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
The Error of Penal Substitution: Jesus Did Not Die in My Place
By Bob Myhan
Penal Substitution is that theory of the atonement that says that God demands the payment of the penalty for sin by a substitute in order to remain just while justifying man. In other words, God cannot justly forgive man unless the punishment for sin is suffered by a substitute for man. And, according to the theory, Jesus is that substitute. He died in your place and in mine that you and I might be justified (or forgiven) and God might remain just.
It seems to this writer that, if the theory were true, either Calvinism or Universalism would follow because salvation would then be unconditional.
Calvinism posits that all humans are born totally and hereditarily depraved, that God unconditionally elected certain individuals to salvation, that the atonement was limited to the elect and that all the elect will persevere to the end. Universalism holds that, since Jesus died for all, all will be saved. Both affirm that all those for whom Jesus died will be saved because their sins were punished in the person of Jesus. However, Jesus was not a substitute but a sacrifice.
What one is willing to sacrifice for a person or cause is an indicator of the love he has for that person or cause. The life of a living thing is in the blood thereof (Lev. 17:11). Therefore, to shed the blood of a living thing is to sacrifice the life thereof. The sacrifice of Jesus’ life was the ultimate demonstration of the love of God (Rom. 5:1-11; 8:31-39; John 3:16) and of Christ (John 15:13; 1 John 3:16) for humankind.
If the Son of God had come into the world immediately after the sin of Adam and Eve, there is no way anyone could ever have appreciated the love of God. And one could hardly reciprocate a love that he does not appreciate. For this reason, God incorporated the idea of sacrifice into religion so that, in the fullness of time, His love could be demonstrated—through the sacrifice of His Son—so that man could appreciate it and would be motivated to reciprocate it.
The Old Testament was taken out of the way and the New Testament was dedicated by the pouring out of Christ’s blood and the sacrifice of His life (Col. 2:14; Heb. 10:1-10; 9:16-18).
The shedding of Jesus’ blood in His death on the cross also reveals “the goodness of God” that “leads you to repentance” (Rom. 2:3-4), it provides a focal point for man’s faith in God and in His Son (Rom. 3:21-26) and only the shedding of the precious blood of Jesus the Lamb could demonstrate the magnitude of sin (Rom. 8:1-4).
Some who are neither Calvinists nor Universalists also hold this theory but these seem to this writer to be inconsistent. If Jesus was punished for the sins of anyone, then those for whose sins He was punished will not be punished. Nor would they need forgiveness. Furthermore, eternal security would then be unconditional. If this is not the case, why is it not?
Therefore, Jesus did not die in my place or yours. It was His place and His alone, to die on that cross. He died on the cross, not as punishment but as a sacrifice for sin. He did this that we might realize both the enormity of sin and the magnitude of His love and His Father’s love for us and that we might be motivated to love them in return.
Yes, we were “redeemed by the blood of the Lamb” but only in the sense that His blood purchased our release from sin by providing the conditions of our forgiveness.