I recently heard an Emergent leader say that the Penal Substitutionary Atonement view of Christ was an outpouring of the western judicial system. Following him saying that someone asked the question, "Show me a verse or passage in the Bible in support for Penal Substitutionary Atonement". [I made a slight mistake here and after going back and reading what he said I realized that he really was wanting to know, not attacking, however, I also realize that there are many people that may well say there are no texts for Substitution so the rest of ths blog still stands] This is astounding. It is one thing to say that you do not agree with a view, it is entirely another to say that there is absolutely no support for the view, especially the view in question.
Without attacking anyone, without patronizing anyone, and without being guilty of ad hominem in arguing vehemently for the wrath of God I want to defend this wonderful doctrine as outspokenly and biblically as possible.
First please notice that I do say wonderful doctrine. I am in a cultural minority when I say that, because right now it is un-trendy to say that God is wrathful enough and hates sin enough to kill Jesus on our behalf. I really am a wholehearted proponent of this doctrine being equated with the Gospel. It is true and I intend to explain why.
First: What is the doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement?
I won't go too deep into answer here. Most of those reading this will know what goes into it. This is how it goes. Man is screwed up and ultimately sinful and deserve to die (depravity but thats a different blog, Rom 3:23, Rom 6:23, Isa. 64:6), God's righteousness must be satisfied and his righteous law must be satisfied so Jesus came and recieved the punishment (penal) we deserved (substitutionary) and satisfied God (atonement) with His blood for us so that we may have his righteousness for our own and be able to stand before God.
This definitely assumes some things. God hates sin being one of them, God will punish sinners being another of them. So without going to far and typing too much I want to place one of my key texts.
Leviticus 17:11
For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you on the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement.
Leviticus 17:14a
For as for the life of all flesh, its blood is identified with its life.
This is Old Testament law mind you, but the principle is there. Nothing has changed from Israel's time. We still need blood to atone for us. We still need sacrifice to be atoned for. This is also blatant proof that blood atonement has been a doctrine since well before the western judicial system was ever in practice as Leviticus dates to around 1450 BC which is 800 years before the Greek judicial system even came into practice.
So the second question is then, how will atonement be made for our souls? Will we have to sacrifice an animal on an altar in order to be atoned for? The answer to this question is simply, no. No, because Jesus was that atonement for our souls. How can I prove that? The Bible. Yes friends it certainly does say in the Bible that Jesus was a sacrifice for our sins and that he satisfied God. So where? That is what I intend to prove.
Isaiah 53:4-12
4 Surely our griefs He Himself bore, and our sorrows He carried; Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted. 5 But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, and by His scourging we are healed. 6 All of us like sheep have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; but the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him. 7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He did not open His mouth; Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, and like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, so He did not open His mouth. 8 By oppression and judegment He was taken away; and as for His generation, who considered that He was cut off out of the land of the living for the transgression of my people, to whom the stroke was due? 9 His grave was assigned with wicked men, yet He was with a rich man in His death, because He had done no violence, nor was there any deciet in His mouth. 10 But the Lord was pleased to crush Him, putting Him to grief; If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, and the good pleasure of the Lord will prosper in His hand. 11 As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see it and be satisfied; By his knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will justify the many, as He will bear their iniquities. 12 Therefore I will allot Him a portion with the great, and He will divide the booty with the strong; Because He poured out Himself to death, and was numbered with the transgressors, yet He Himself bore the sin of many, and interceded for the transgressors.
I do not know how anyone can possibly say that Jesus was not meant in the Leviticus 17 sense to be the atonement on our behalf. Please, please, please, look at the words in verse 10,
"But the Lord was pleased to crush Him, putting Him to grief; If He would render Himself as a guilt offering."
And please see the language in verse 11,
"As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see it and be satisfied."
Jesus is the greatest guilt offering ever made and there is this text that says it loudly and clearly. I would further and emphatically like to note that there is loud and clear substitute language here and note the date of Isaiah, that being between 740 and 700 BC. This is again way before the western legal judicial system. I also doubt that Greek influence stretched at all into the Jewish way of life since the Greeks were pretty well taken with their own internal problems and Persia.
Finally for this blog I will note one last text. It isn't the only text and I promise that one day I will write a book that proves that there are far more than "seeds" of Penal Substitute ideas in Pauline Theology.
Romans 5:9-11
9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him. 10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. 11 And not only this, but we also exult in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now recieved the reconciliation.
This is merely a taste of the Pauline thought of Substitution throughout his writings. I want to ask just a few questions on this one.
1. How are we justified from Romans 5:9?
2. What are we being saved from in 9?
3. Through whom are we saved in 9?
4. Who are we being reconciled to in verse 10?
5. Through what are we being reconciled in 10?
6. What are we doing in verse 11?
7. Is this possible to do without verses 9 and 10?
They are simple answers are they not?
That said I love Jesus. I pray for their sake that those who will talk like this, that is saying there is no mention of Substitution in the Bible or worse that Penal Substitution is simply a remanant of Western legal thinking, will come to realize just how dangerous this type of talking is. I will go so far as to say that you lose Jesus if you lose this doctrine. The Old Testament set of sacrifices become incoherent, Isaiah 53 becomes babble, and Jesus blood becomes what? I really would like to know. What is the point of that whole cross thingie if it wasn't for our hope? He is Lord and He was indeed pierced for our transgressions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
