3 Reasons I changed my mind about Penal Substitution

Penal Substitution, the Biblical and ONLY way. The article you link is by someone who really does not understand this crucially important Doctrine. Galatians 3:13 is one of the strongest verses in the Bible that teaches this, which Daniel Hames fails to address, and therefore very selective in his theology.

"Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree"

 

The real use and purpose of the formula is to emphasize the two distinct aspects of our Lord's vicarious obedience. The truth expressed rests upon the recognition that the law of God has both penal sanctions and positive demands. It demands not only the full discharge of its precepts but also the infliction of penalty for all infractions and shortcomings. It is this twofold demand of the law of God which is taken into account when we speak of the active and passive obedience of Christ. Christ as the vicar of his people came under the curse and condemnation due to sin and he also fulfilled the law of God in all its positive requirements. In other words, he took care of the guilt of sin and perfectly fulfilled the demands of righteousness. He perfectly met both the penal and the preceptive requirements of God's law. The passive obedience refers to the former and the active obedience to the latter. Christ's obedience was vicarious in the bearing of the full judgment of God upon sin, and it was vicarious in the full discharge of the demands of righteousness. His obedience becomes the ground of the remission of sin and of actual justification.

The Nature of the Atonement by John Murray

And the dangerous modern trend against the Bible's Teaching

"Made a Curse for Us" | Banner of Truth UK

 

He changed his mind suddenly because he read Brian McLaren and Steve Chalke. That says it all.

I agree that the whole OT points to it, but for me the simplest "clobber verse" is John 1:29: Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. I gave this as a pre-Easter memory verse to our school kids just a few weeks ago, so that they would be ready to respond to anyone who doubted that Jesus died for our sins. John knew it the moment he saw him, before he even performed his first miracle.

 

The BLASPHEMY of Steve Chalke

A Scandalous Attack on The Cross | Banner of Truth UK

 

1 Corinthians 15:3, "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died FOR our sins in accordance with the Scriptures"

ὑπέρ, in place of, instead of

1 Peter 2:24, "who His own self bore OUR sins in His own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness; by whose stripes ye were healed"

 

Had to smile when I saw your reference to John 1:29, my favorite verse.

Penal Substitution theory sails under false colors. It is a Trojan Horse for Calvinism's Limited Atonement. The issue is not whether Christ death provided the substitunary sacrifice necessary for the remission of sin. Christ's resurrection demonstrates it did. The issue is not the error of pitting one Person of the Trinity against another. And the issue is certainly not the mistaken views of fallible scholars.

Happy Easter

 

Van, again your complete ignorance of Biblical theology is apparant! I am NOT a Calvinist, or Reformed in my theology, and I have since the day that I was born again on 24th February 1982, I have 100% believed in Penal Substitution, as the ONLY teaching from the Bible, for the Death of Jesus Christ. Unless you are a Roman Catholic, or a follower of the rank heretic, Steve Chalke? Show from the Holy Bible that Penal Substitution is wrong. I can guarantee you, that you CANNOT!

 

Theories of the Atonement by Leon Morris

 

Sir, any mindless twit can shout "you are a follower of a rank heretic." Question, did Christ lay down His life as a ransom for all? If He paid for the specific sins of those never to be saved, why does God require double payment during their torment in the afterlife? I expect you will not answer the question.

 

Van, do you even understand what Penal Substitution is?

 

As predicted, no answer to a simple question.

Question, did Christ lay down His life as a ransom for all? If He paid for the specific sins of those never to be saved, why does God require double payment during their torment in the afterlife?

Tic Tok ...

 

Here we have another mind reader posting change the subject and do not answer the question twaddle.

 

how about you showing from the Bible that Penal Substitution is wrong, instead of quoting from someone who has Steve Chalke as his reference? Your OP shows that you don't understand this Doctrine

 

It is clear from yet another nonsense response from you, that you don't understand what Penal Substitution really is!

 

apologies, I misread you, the OP is from the link