How a person can read the entire Bible and not become Catholic is beyond me. Everything in Protestantism rests on cherry-picking scripture to create this bizarre narrative that completely dismisses free will and human accountability. “Jesus did everything so I can do nothing”. What utter nonsense! Please keep doing what you’re doing!
You are quickly becoming one of my favorite Catholic podcasts. The simple way you explain things has a way of sanding off the rough edges so that I can better understanding things. Keep up the great work.
I'm a lifelong catholic Ive never been exposed until now to this strange idea by Calvin of God and the Son being at odds its completely unbiblical show me where it says Abba and Jesus are at odds
Really appreciate this video..Christus Victor is widely considered to be the dominant theory for most of the historical Church...Penal Substitionary theory is a novelty of the Protestant Reformation..
Thank you! I’ve listened to your series twice now! I owe a lot to you as there isn’t a lot out there who cover this. 😊 I’m super stoked that you commented! 😃
@@IdolKiller I like what Dr Harwood has to say on it in his Theology, "After surveying the biblical material on the person and work of Christ as well as reviewing the various atonement models, I agree with Charles E. Hill, “It is easy to see why the New Testament’s reflections on the atoning work of Christ are so astonishingly rich and complex. No single description, whether by metaphor or by plain speech, can comprehend the fullness of the revelation of what God has done in Christ in reconciling the world to himself.”43 Rather than selecting one atonement model to the exclusion of the others, each model should be considered as one facet of a multifaceted diamond.44 Harwood, Adam. Christian Theology: Biblical, Historical, and Systematic . Lexham Academic. Kindle Edition.
@catharsis77 I'd agree as far as it pertains to the Models held by the Early Church, but disagree as to Anselmian Atonement Theories as they reject forgiveness and claim God was the problem rather than man, as well as splitting the Trinity
@@IdolKiller Yeah, that wasn't one of the 8 that Harwood discussed. I don't agree with what I just read about it either. Edit: Correction, he does mention it but not to the extent you explained.
You might like this ancient church father's saying, "It wasn't the cross of Christ that secured the love of God, but it was the love of God that secured the cross of Christ." John Chrysostom.
The genetic fallacy of claiming any similarity means origin does not work. Pagans pray, so prayer came from Paganism? Pagans believe in a spiritual realm, so a spiritual realm is Pagan? It makes no sense.
Honesty, this kind of content about penal substitution is what originally got me curious about Orthodoxy. I still tried to stay Protestant for a while. But seeing that the cross was just a simple legalistic transaction in Protestantism was my starting point. Ironic that I always called Catholics and Orthodox legalistic when the two primary reformers were students of law and created legalistic theology.
Here's a Wayne Grudem quote from his Systematic Theology (2020), page 707. "It is important to notice that in both of these categories [of Christ's work] the primary emphasis and THE PRIMARY INFLUENCE of Christ's work of redemption IS NOT ON US BUT ON GOD the Father…In both cases, the atonement is viewed as objective, that is, something that has primary influence directly on God. Only secondarily does it have application to us, and this is only because there was a definite event in the relationship between God the Father and God the Son that secured our salvation." [All caps added by me.] PSA is primarily intended to change God, not us. It only "applies" to us. PSA insists that any mandatory change on our part, even out of faith in our hearts, is works. It is a distortion of the biblical message and tells you a lot of why PSA preachers struggle so much with sin.
Great post! To your point, PSA contends that we are saved by "works of the law", aka forensic/penal judgment, and not by Grace. God the Father is seen as a forensic judge constrained by the letter of the law, and not a spiritual judge who is abundant in grace.
@@lisnafulla Right. PSA has no genuine forgiveness or mercy. A debt can only be forgiven or mercy extended BEFORE it has been paid. After a debt has been fully paid there is no forgiveness or mercy that can possibly be granted.
Galatians 3:13: “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.’”
This does not even mean PST, it just means Christ fufilled the Law putting it to a end or change, as we still follow the law, what changed is how we follow it, which is by intention of Love or charity, instead of just obeying the law as a list of requirements as if we were forced servants, instead of voluntary ones
@@Onlyafool172 Where in your view explains that Christ (became) a curse (for us). Christ became something and it was done for us. If Christ became something namely a curse then how? In what sense? He did it for us what does that mean? Your explanation goes nowhere in explaining the strength of what is being suggested here.
@jotink1 if we read this verse litterraly it means Christ is a curse that curses us, and some how redeems us from another curse. What this verse means is that Christ was tormented to free us from the torment of the law, which was his main menssage, because the law how the pharisees understood it, was the law for the law, basically the law was a bunch of requisites they must fufill, instead of something with a purpose, so they followed the law of flesh, which Paul is referencing here, the law of the flesh is fufilles externally as if God was your boss, thus you serve him as a slave, the law how Christ teaches us is a spiritual. Law, that is by intention of 1 loving God, and 2 loving thy neighboor as yourself, that you obey the law, hence why God is called The Father now, because we are his sons, we are not punished for slip ups, because as Paul says" I do the evil I dont want to and dont do the good I want to" this is his point on galantians, thats the curse lifted, rather than a wrath appeasing kill, it about calling us to be sons of God, and by the merits of his life which are superabundent (because he is perfectly obidient to God, and he is God) that we are saved, and on the cross his life fufilled the law , now its not by merits of deeds that we are called to the same sonship of Jesus so we can partake on his merits
@@jotink1 because Yt deleted my comment I will just simplify it, basically this verse is talking about the Law, and how Christ even tho he followed the Law, by deturpation of it the pharisees still placed him on punishment, bur Christ saves us from the law by Revealing the true law, which is done by spirit, not by the flesh, and thats Paul's point here, the law how pharisees understood, was very much like the laws we have on society, they exist to not be broken, so the law is done externally not internally, because by ignoring what the law has as purpose which is sanctification, they would not strive for a true internal change to be United by God, so now we follow the law of the spirit, which was taught by Christ, we obey it because of Love, and to grow closer to him so we are not condemmed by slip ups, or sins we so fall because of our weakeness, but instead we are condemmed by what there is on our hearts. Basically according to pharisees we are slaves of the law, according to Christ we are Sons of God, and obey the law out of Love
Thank you for this video. I spent many years as a Protestant before coming home as a Catholic revert. This video made me realize that I have been still viewing the atonement as a penal substitution. The way God has been opening my eyes has been amazing to me as He unravels the Protestantism that had been engrained in me. Thank you again!
Part of the issue is that Jesus did die for our sins, so their is in some way a substitionary atonment, but loving rather than penal. It just isn't penal. God is a wicked pagan god who needs appeasing in this way.
To obey is better than sacrifice could not be true if God needed to be placated by a blood offering. He is so much higher than everything! His desire was to have us with Him and He made the way! God set the rules, so the fallen created being (Satan) can only deceive through religious teachings. There's so much more to unpack in all that was accomplished on the cross beside the atonement. Yes, the sacrifice had to happen to fulfill the Law & the prophets, but HE came to literally breathe life back into whomsoever. John 3:16-17. I'm very happy to hear you talk about the immense LOVE that God the Father had/has for us! & that He is not angry at us, but at the evil. He's not the great task-master, but He is just! He has His ways. Paradoxical & impossible to comprehend if one isn't abiding in His Spirit. His ways are foolishness to the wise and the worldly. THANK GOD!!!! He hid them from the wise and revealed them to His precious 'babes'!👍👍
I was in a theology course once, and the reformed teacher was telling about his gripe with redemption through the cross. I never understood this. It is the greatest sign of His love for us! Now i understand. He did not see the redemption as i did. Christ bearing all that suffering and death, bearing all the consequence of sin so He can be WITH us in our suffering and help us overcome it. What my teacher was arguing against was penal substistution... It is sometimes challenging in an oecumenical setting. It is like speaking different languages
What i want to say, is thank you! I can now see better where my reformed brothers and sisters come from. I was very miffed at my teacher at the time. I thought it was scandalous to argue against the redemptive aspect of the cross to a group of aspiring catechists. But i see now what he was aguing against, and i would argue against that too. I would have liked for him to give a better alternative, but i see he meant well
Protestant here - genuinely trying to understand various perspectives, especially those fundamental to salvation. I appreciate you trying to honestly represent the PSA perspective, but I do feel as though you may not fully comprehend that view in order to represent it fairly and thus debate it. Though I'm not a Calvinist, I do believe in the imputed righteousness of Christ, understanding He took our sin upon Himself, and gave us His righteousness. Is it not the catholic belief that God's justice is perfect and there is penalty for sin... that penalty being death? "For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus (Romans 6:23)." Furthermore, scripture plainly shows that Christ suffered bc of our transgressions: "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 (ISA 53:5)." Also, "For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God 2 Cor 5:21." It is the blood of the sacrifice that covers our sin - we see this in Genesis 3 w/ the first sacrifice, covering the sin of Adam and Eve. Elsewhere, I believe you misrepresent the Calvinist... and broader Protestant perspective is in your explanation of the Trinity. I know of no reformed persons that would separate the Father from God on the cross. To say that God forsook Christ, the person, is to agree with the 4th Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon where the Church explicitly defined the relationship b/t Jesus' divine nature and His human nature. Jesus was not abused by the Father and forced on the cross to appease an angry God. Scripture tells us that God (all three persons of the Trinity) are offended by sin. Jesus is the eternal Son, and when He died on the cross, He was there because He chose to lay down His life. The Great Judge, the One who will judge all humanity, freely gave up His grace, humbled Himself, and paid the wadge for our sin. It's strange to hear you explain it as if it was a vindictive God against an innocent Jesus - perhaps I am now misrepresenting your perspective and if that is the case, I apologize. And while there's much to be discussed here, I want to make one final point. This is, in fact, an early Church concept. 'The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus' (2nd-century) says this: "O sweet exchange! O unsearchable operation! O benefits surpassing all expectation! That the wickedness of many should be hid in a single righteous One, and that the righteousness of One should justify many transgressors!" Not wanting to seem too reformed, but Augustine (354-430 AD) is understood by nearly all Christians to be perhaps the greatest theological mind of the 4th and 5th century. In his commentary on Psalm 51 he said, "For even the Lord was subject to death, but not on account of sin: He took upon Him our punishment, and so looseth our guilt... Now, as men were lying under this wrath by reason of their original sin... there was need for a mediator, that is for a reconciler, who by the offering of one sacrifice, of which all the sacrifices of the law and the prophets were types, should take away this wrath... Now when God is said to be angry, we do not attribute to Him such a disturbed feeling as exists in the mind of an angry man; but we call His just displeasure against sin by the name "anger," a word transferred by analogy for human emotions.
Well put, I guess I can understand where Catholics are coming from but I agree that PSA does indeed seem to be thoroughly Biblical and speaks more fully into the love relationship Christ has for us being willing to endure the wrath of God on our behalf. Also not a Calvinist.
There is a difference between the belief that Christ is our Redeemer through His redemptive sacrifice and the belief purported by PSA that the purpose of Christ's sacrifice was to satisfy God's wrath. No-one is disputing that Christ is our Redeemer. Rather, He suffered and died for us as an act of Grace - not as an act of legalism. He showed us that He conquered death so that we can believe and follow Him. He died for US sinners to move US into Him - it is US sinners who needed Him - not an allegedly punitive God incapable of forgiveness, grace and mercy. The purpose of God's discipline is restorative - not merely punitive.
@@lisnafulla Appreciate the clarity. In most instances, it sounds like the two sides are speaking past one another but essentially saying the same thing. I think that oversimplifies the nuances, and maybe dilutes the issues w/ wording, but I can certainly agree with most of what you said and still hold the position that Christ paid the penalty of death - a penalty we all owe. That does not negate the love of God, rather proves the love of God. Without perfect justice, God cannot be love. Also, I'm not sure where the idea that protestants believe that "God is incapable of forgiveness, grace, and mercy." That's a serious misunderstanding or misrepresentation... in this case it appears to be both. I would like to see where such a belief is held in any mainline protestant denomination. I mean read the writings of the puritans alone - which are dripping with God's grace, mercy, and forgiveness - prove our desperate need for a savior. Furthermore, the only one capable of complete salvation is God Himself. He created the law, and He fulfilled the law. In Him there is no more condemnation or death. Conversely, outside of Him, condemnation and death await. Finally, I also agree that God's perfect justice is restorative. But again, that does not negate the fact that there remains a penalty for continued disobedience (punitive action).
@@lisnafulla this explanation you suggest also makes great sense. And I am by no means knowledgeable on this subject although I will be researching more in the future. But I do not immediately understand why both cannot be true at the same time. Of course Christ conquered death and redeems us by His grace. But how does this process work. Ultimately his act of dying on the cross seems unnecessary if it was not to be the sacrificial lamb for our sins. How does his dying forgive us if it's not a satisfying of justice? Although I am totally on board for Christ conquering death and prevailing thus showing love is greater than death, I don't think legalism is apart of this conversation at all. Legalism is the idea that salvation is attained by a system of rules to merit salvation. Christ's sacrifice is not only a victory over sin and death but is most certainly as you say an act of grace where he takes on the wrath of God. Albeit, this is not equivalent to Him going to hell forever because Hell is where sinners go to continue in sin. Christ has no sin in Him. So I guess my main question to you is "How does Jesus's death redeem us if it isn't satisfying God justice and wrath?" After all it is God who judges people and condemns them. And people do still die and sin so it isn't as if Christ stopped it altogether, He showed that He can save us from death.
@@narrowpath1898 Thanks for your comment. I agree with you that there is much overlap in what both sides believe as regards Jesus' atonement. I do believe that the notion that God the Father had to inflict his wrath on Jesus - as a matter of justice - is incompatible with the belief that Jesus' atonement was an act of Grace, given FREELY to us, planned by the Father and performed by Jesus. Biblical forgiveness means foregoing retributive "justice". The Prodigal Son was not subject to "justice" - hence the complaint by his brother to his father in that Parable. Those who profess themselves as children of the Father and co-sons with Christ, are not under the legalism of the Father's justice in terms of salvation, rather we are under His gift of grace. The workers who came at the last hour were paid the same as the workers who came earier in the day - another parable contradicting man's view of "justice". Christ died for us - in obedience to the Father and in whom the Father was well pleased. This further contradicts the notion that the Father inflicted his wrath onto his Son. The wrath that Jesus suffered was the consequence of sin - death - that Christ suffered despite his innocence based on the unjust judgment of men who rejected Him as our Messiah.
“God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood-to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished- he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus. Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. Because of what law? The law that requires works? No, because of the law that requires faith.” Romans 3:25-27 NIV
@@EmbracingTradition100hi thank for the video but I am a little bit confused on what would be the point of Christ death if it is not to atone for sins I would really appreciate it if you would clarify this for me because it’s very interesting, but I don’t fully understand the concept that you have presented on the point of what Christ death was for
@@bullofthewoods9491 I believe that Christ atoned for our sins but I believe the atonement is not about Christ being punished by His Father. Christ gave His life as an acceptable sacrifice to destroy death, sin and the devil in His person and by doing so enables us to be born again, and to walk in His ways ending in the ultimate purification of our souls.
massive problems with your translation, a fact demonstrating the arbitrariness of protestant interpretations of Scripture - 'atonement' is not in the Greek text, rather, hilasterion, meaning, instrument of expiation, which means purification - 'unpunished' is not in the text altogether - it's an invention, in order to confirm the idea of penal substitution - 'have faith in Jesus' is not in the text - instead, it says, 'those who belong to Christ's faithfulness'
At this point, it’s not even about convincing Prots, it’s about bringing souls to Heaven. Halfway thru the book “On the Fewness of the Saved”…once saved, always saved is a conveyor belt to eternal damnation.
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans. This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth. I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
“And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. 30 I and my Father are one.” John 10:28-30 The idea that it is the remnant that will be saved is concerning. “No one can take them out of my hand” does seem to support eternal security. I guess you could make a case that he lets people go of his own Will; but the verse doesn’t address that.
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans. This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth. I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
Thanks for explaining your point of view. I am starting to think more about exactly what Jesus accomplished on the cross and I want to hear the various perspectives. Given your framework, how would you interpret these verses from Isaiah? Isaiah 53:3, 53:10 Thanks, John Beggs
You said in 18:20 "You can't propitiate a being who is already willing to forgive." If we follow that argument then the question arises: Can God forgive even without Christ His Son dying on the cross?
A ton of passages suggest that God forgives sin before the cross. Also to make someone propitious does not always mean they were angry. If you go and buy someone flowers or make them dinner can make them propitious i.e. happy. There are plenty of sacrifices that do not have anything to do with sin or wrong doing.
Lutheran here, I’ve also had some reservations with Penal Substitutionary Atonement and Anselmian Satisfaction (the latter of which my tradition has largely followed along with). This is a really great video and you really covered most of the feelings I have towards these false (I would even say heretical) ideas. Though I would like to add another issue you did not mention in this video, that being that most people neglect the Holy Spirit in their ideas of satisfaction and atonement. Is not the same Holy Spirit which resided in Christ, now in His bride, the Church? It is that same Holy Spirit which by faith allows people to become members of the Church and receive God’s love and grace, whether that is just general or in the Sacraments (Baptism, Eucharist, Confession & Absolution). I would consider it more intellectually honest to be a binitarian than to fully accept Anselmian Satisfaction and Penal Substitution (both are terrible, I’m just saying that one is at least more intellectually honest in the flow of thought). Again great video, just something else I thought was missing.
A sinner can become a believer By Faith in Jesus Christ and believing in what he has done on the cross to redeem us from Sin and so that they can be forgiven of their Sins by accepting him into our lives and making him Lord and Savior now once a person becomes saved they must work with the Lord to stay in right standing with him by abiding in the Word and living a lifestyle of prayer and fasting and always exercising Love towards God and one another and turning away from wickedness through repentance and we must do that which is Good and righteous in the sight of God and If we choose to meet the requirements that are essential to staying within Christ then there is nothing that can separate us from Gods love unless we choose to walk away from Christ and not meet the requirements to stay in right standing with him Philippians2:10-12 Roman’s 8:38-39 however our works alone doesn’t save us it is upon us choosing wether or ky we are gonna have having faith in Jesus Christ. so our works doesn’t outweigh Gods grace sister
You are right. PSA disolves God's grace, since Xaris in Greek means chiefly "cheerfulness". PSA erases God's grace by demanding his wrath be put onto someone still - in the case of PSA onto Jesus. That is not Grace.
This is interesting and the point about forgiving as God does helped me reflect. What surprised me though was when you said God doesn’t have emotions. How does God the Father weep and laugh and be a “jealous” God in that case? How does God the son/Christ also weep and “look around at them in anger, and deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts…”. For Christ’s case someone might say (I’m not saying you would say this) that it’s because of his human nature, but to assign it only to his human nature reminds me of St. Cyril’s 4th anathema, “If anyone distributes between the two persons or hypostases the expressions used either in the gospel or in the apostolic writings, whether they are used by the holy writers of Christ or by Him about Himself and ascribes some to him as a man, thought of separately from the Word from God, and others as befitting God, to him as to the Word from God the Father, let him be anathema.” I’m obviously not trying to say you’re anathema, I don’t know nearly enough to say that about anyone, it just reminded me of it and I was wondering what you mean. It’s also unnerving to imagine a God who weeps but in reality feels nothing. I know that just because something is comforting doesn’t mean it’s true, but I have found comfort in reading that Jesus seems to have emotions as He weeps for Lazarus (even when He knows He will raise him) and shows anguish in the Garden of Gethsemane. It’s a solace knowing that even the perfect lamb of God didn’t experience the world indifferently, but had internal states of mind that were responses to external events - which I would define as the essence of emotions.
I am referring to the doctrine of impassability. God doesn’t have emotions like we have emotions, but certainly Christ human nature did allow him to have human emotions as well as experience all that comes with being a human being such as death and sickness. I can’t articulate fully in a comment here but I would just encourage you to look into the doctrine of impassability.
Not only was God’s death necessary in Jesus but only perfect love can restore a relationship with perfect love hence opening up the gates of Heaven. The joy of the Cross Paul mentions is exactly this how the wages of sin have been paid so that we may have life and not all go automatically to the eternal separation of Hell according to God’s Justice.
When we read in Genesis 2:17 that God told Adam, regarding the tree of the knowledge of good and evil “in the day that you eat of it, you will surely die,” we see that there is a death sentence pronounced as the punishment for sin, but when Adam did sin, we don’t see an execution, which is what we should expect, instead, we see a redemption. After they ate of the tree, instead of killing them right then and there that day, which is what they rightly deserved, in Genesis 3:21, we see that God makes a “propitiation” on their behalf, that is, that God Himself makes an offering to satisfy the justice of God against sin. God took an animal that had known no sin and He killed it before their eyes instead of them, and out of that innocent animal, He made skins of clothing and placed them over Adam and Eve. So we see that not only was a sinless substitute killed on behalf of guilty sinners condemned to die, but because they were covered in the skins of the sinless substitute, from now on whenever God sees these sinners, He sees the innocent animal who died on their behalf, and who now covers them. Obviously, the death of the innocent animal did not take away their sins, but by being covered with the innocent animal who died on their behalf, it appeased the justice of God until the time when an ultimate sacrifice would be made that would not just cover sins, but would actually remove them - this is commonly referred to as “Penal Substitutionary Atonement.” Through the sacrifice of an animal, God taught Israel that the wages of sin is death (Genesis 2:17), but that through the shedding of blood, through an innocent dying in the place of another, there is a way of escaping the wrath of God, and through that act, we also have a way that we may approach God (Romans 6:23, cf. Matthew 27:51). Israel knew well that the sacrifice of an animal was never enough to remove the sins from an individual, and we see this in Psalm 40:6, because if that were true, then there would be no need to continuously sacrifice animals day after day, but that through the sacrifice of an animal, Israel saw an object lesson that looked forward to the promise of the one sacrifice that was to come that would not just cover sins, but would remove them, truly justifying us before God. In the Old Testament sacrificial system, the individual Israelite was instructed to bring an animal sacrifice whenever he approached God; the family was to kill and consume an animal at the yearly observance of the Passover; the nation was to be represented by the high priest annually on the Day of Atonement when the blood of the offering was sprinkled on the mercy seat of the Ark of the Covenant within the Holy of Holies of the Jewish temple, and at the opening of the New Testament, John the Baptist recognized Jesus as “The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29)! So, the progression was like this: One sacrifice for one individual One sacrifice for one family One sacrifice for one nation One sacrifice for the world (John 1:29, cf. John 3:16) It is a very Biblical concept that has nothing to do with reformed theology as we find teachings referencing it all over scripture.
1. If I pronounce the consequences of an action does that mean that I am the executor? It literally says if you do this, you will die, (dying you will die). Not I will execute punishment. 2. Yes, Adam did transgress a commandment, but Paul seems to think that the idea of sin already existed and it was through sin that death came into the world. Actually Jewish traditions says, through the envy of the devil, death entered the world since man participated through his deception. 3. Why would God make himself propitious by killing an animal? That literally makes no sense given that scripture dose not even say that (maybe it hints at the death of an animal). It just say that he made them garments of skin. Then expels them so that they would not remain in a state of death forever. 4. " from now on whenever God sees these sinners, He sees the innocent animal who died on their behalf" Where does it say that in any Jewish writings or tradition? Completely made up. 5. Through the sacrifice of an animal in the Torah, show me where any sin was placed on the animal and died by the wrath of God in place of the offered? Except on the day of atonement where the sins of the people were place on the scapegoat. 6. Finally, the justice of God dose not require the death of the innocent in order to be appeased or "made propitious". A matter of fact scripture says the complete opposite, that God dose not even delight in the death of the sinner, he most certainly does not delight in the death of the innocent, even Moses tried to take the place of Israel and God rejected it, EVEN God would not take accept the death of Issac. Punishing the innocent on our behalf dose not make GOD happy, maybe the pagan god Zeus. Sacrifice is absolutely a biblical concept throughout all of scripture but by means of reconciliation and purification and did not always require the death of something or someone.
And one more thing. The video seems to be talking about atonement and not necessarily the Passover about Christ being the Lamb of God. Which was a separate feast Day from the day of atonement. Which had nothing to do with propitiation but rather manumission.
@@domega7392 Since this is not exactly the best format for an in-depth discussion, I humbly recommend these books for a Biblical understanding of the Atonement. "To Save Sinners," by Michael Riccardi "Redemption Accomplished and Applied," by John Murray (probably the better in this list) "Definite Atonement," by Gary D. Long "Original Sin: The Doctrine of Imputation, Vital to the Christian Faith," by Gary Long "The Imputation of Adam's Sin," by John Murray "The Doctrine of God," by John Frame, though not the main topic of the book, he does of course go into the atonement
Excellent job! What I'd like to see -- a discussion between you and a reformed theologian/ well-versed person on this topic. I think your arguments are excellent, but would like to hear the other side in defense. Over-all I sense in you both intellectual rigor, and a good heart!
Penal substitutionary Atonement, a novelty? As it is written in Isaiah, 700 years before the Lord Jesus Christ's death, burial and Resurrection: Isaiah 53:5 But he (the Lord Jesus Christ) 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. 6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned-every one-to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. ...v.10 Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him (Jesus); he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for guilt,... V.12b because he (Jesus) poured out his soul to death and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and makes intercession for the transgressors. Once again, god gave that to Isaiah 700 years before the Lord Jesus's crucifixion. It is blatantly obvious what that passage is teaching and you have to lie to yourself to believe anything else. Let's see how the Apostle Paul articulates the most important aspects of the Gospel: 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, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures," What scriptures is Paul talking about? It's Isaiah. The clearest description of what the death of the Messiah was actually accomplishing and what was going on in the unseen realm.
@EmbracingTradition100 well I see you can't argue with the scriptures. Are you omniscient? Can you really tell me that absolutely zero people believed what Isaiah and Paul said for 1500 years? Not on your life. God always has a Remnant who is faithful to the written word of God instead of the vain traditions of men.
As for the early church not getting the memo, here's the Apostle Peter's first epistle we're in he quotes Isaiah 53 concerning the sufferings of Christ. 1 Peter 2: 21 For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps. 22 He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth. 23 When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly. 24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed Please read the chapter side by side. You'll see that the language used in Peter's second chapter is identical with that of Isaiah 53. As regards the early church, here is a good article in which early church father's outside of the earliest Believers and apostolic community teach substitutionary Atonement. www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/penal-substitution-early-church/
@@treasurevessel It was good that you cited 1 Peter 2:21. But this does not prove or even suggest PSA - the notion that God inflicted wrath on His innocent Son as a pre-condition for forgiveness. Biblical forgiveness foregoes forensic justice in favor of love. The Prodigal Son was forgiven without any penalty. The servant who owed his master a debt was forgiven his debt, but was later condemned only after he sought forensic justice (debt repayment) from another servant. Over and over again God teaches us about his love and mercy for his children. The Levitical Law wasn't meant to be punitive; it's purpose was to teach and instruct. PSA proponents fail to understand this.
@@treasurevesselIsiaiah 53:10 must be read and understood in context. Isaiah 53:5 ESV: "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." This speaks to the purpose of Jesus' suffering as being for healing and redemption - not punitive. Isaiah 53:8 ESV: "By oppression and judgment he was taken away; and as for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people?" This verse states that Christ was oppressed and judged by MAN (his generation). Christ's unjust judgment came from man, not God. Isaiah 53:10 ESV: "Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him; he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand." Based on the Greek and Hebrew texts, an accurate interpretation of this passage is that it was part of God's salvific plan that Christ's human body be crushed. The Hebrew word daka means "allow to be bruised" or "allow to be crushed," implying permission and not the direct infliction of suffering by God himself. The phrase "his soul makes an offering for guilt" (asham in Hebrew) draws from Levitical sacrifices, whose purpose was reparation and restoration and not punitive substitution. Levitical sacrifices were understood to bring reconciliation, symbolizing purification and forgiveness - and not God's pouring out of wrath onto the sacrifice itself. Pay attention to the words "he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the Lord shall prosper". This speaks to the purpose of Christ's submission to unjust suffering, which is to bring a victorious outcome that conquers death and reconciles the faithful to God's will. Thus, the bible expresses the purpose of Christ's suffering as healing, restorative and redemptive - and not as punitive or to bear wrath inflicted by God. Isaiah 53:11 also emphasizes God’s PLEASURE in the Servant’s suffering, which fits with the purpose of redemption and restoration - not with a purpose of punitive retribution. Moreover, elsewhere in Scripture, God's forgiveness is portrayed as unconditional and merciful (e.g., Psalm 103:10-12, Hosea 6:6), without requiring a penal substitute. Isaiah 53 highlights the purpose of the Servant's suffering as being redemptive and not penal. The language of offering, offspring, and prosperity speaks to a restorative purpose rather than a substitutionary punishment.
I appreciate your heart in sharing your understanding with people, knowing that you are exposing yourself to criticism and rebuke. Coming from a non-reformed protestatnt perspective, what I hear is a conflation between justification and sanctification. I think most protestants would agree that the church and our participation (works) are a necessary part of growing in Christ (Sanctifiaction) We reject, however, that this participation is necessary for salvation. Many scriptures describe salvation (justification) as a once and done event in our lives where we are raised to new life, adopted into God's family, guaranteed an inheritance, sealed in the Spirit, etc. Paul, in 1 Cor, describes a lot of things that the believers in Coritnth are doing wrong, be he still addresses them as believers. In Ch. 3 he talks about the idea of works being tested in the fire. Works made of straw will be burned up, the workers will suffer loss, but they are still saved. This seems to support the idea that works are not necessary for salvation, but play a key role in our sanctifiaction, blessing/concequesnce in this world, and varying rewards after judgement. Thank you for bringing up some challenges to PSA that I have not considered. I will explore these more. I pray that God will guide all of us to a fuller understanding of the truth and grant us wisdom and grace when we are engaging with others who we disagree with. Amen. Thank you for your work in this video.
I completely agree, God stepped into time, taking on our Sin, while we where yet sinners Christ died for us! stepping in between our Sin, making The Way of Redemption. Trinitarian doctrine divides Gods personality, This distortion of Who God IS, leads to a confusing understanding of Christ work on His cross. The Truth Of A Loving God that became intimately evolved with His creation is The Greatest Story Ever told indeed. The understanding of a Love so Amazing. God, the Creator of heaven & earth, Chose, to become intimately involved in the very substance in His own creation, coming close, taking upon Himself the form of a servant, humbling to death on the cross, bringing revelation of the Great I AM, the Holy One true God expressed to His creation in human flesh. Healing the sick, raising the dead, feeding the thousands, speaking Truth to the darkness, Word of Life & correction to dead religion. Offering his own begotten body, willingly laying down his human flesh, pouring out precious, PRICELESS blood, so redeeming His creation unto Himself. As He did not leave his body in the grave He Rose again by the power of His eternal Spirit, assessing after 40 days with his disciples, opening their understanding & giving them commandment. They obeyed, returning to Jerusalem & He Poured out His Holy Ghost upon them, indwelling the believers, establishing His New Covenant and a New Creature, His body on earth. All the fullness dwelleth in HIM, there is no other name under heaven, given amount men whereby we must be saved. The Promise is fulfilled in The New Testament Christian Church. Hear Oh Is real, the Lord our God, the Lord is One.
Amen. Assuming if Penal Substitutionary Atonement is right, then there was actually no need for the New Testaments to be written and put together in the bible. Just one page will do.
As a Catholic hearing this for the first time, you explained it well enough to help me immediately understand that penal substitution theology is complete nonsense.
@ So what nonsense do you believe about the origins of the universe? Science definitively states that something most definitely cannot be created from nothing. So what outside of time, space, matter and energy caused time, space, matter and energy to come into existence at the moment of the Big Bang thereby creating the massive universe?
@@Knight-of-the-Immaculata Tee hee! The usual drivel. To start with, I don’t believe anything about the origins of the universe. I suspect that it has existed eternally in one form or another, but I don’t know, and I don’t pretend to know. “Science” doesn’t state that something cannot come from nothing. (The conservation principle is an axiom. It is a necessary assumption.) We have no experience of “nothing”, and we don’t even know whether “nothing” is even possible. But if it is true that something cannot be created from nothing, then you can’t claim that God created the universe. What does “outside of time and space” mean? If anything? We do not know that the universe came into existence at the moment of the Big Bang. If the BB actually happened, it might just have been the beginning of this phase of the universe. If you really have to tell yourself a story about the origin of the universe, why not accept the Daoist version? It makes more sense than the tale of a super ghost saying كُن فَيَكُونُ.
You did a great job pointing out the theological problems with trying to appease God through propitiatory sacrifices like some kind of pagan, but... "If anyone saith that the sacrifice of the Mass ... is not a propiatory sacrifice ... let him be anathema." (Council of Trent, Session 22, Canon III)
Catholics mean something very different with the word propitiation than Calvinists and evangelicals. At least to my understanding. Shameless Popery deals with the topic much better than I can if you go watch him on this subject. 😌
She was talking about PSA appeasing God's anger by punishing Christ in place of men. The Catholic view is more propitiating God by offering Him something greater than what man's sins have taken away, and that is the love and obedience of Christ offered to the Father on our behalf. Jesus submitting to his passion and death is an act of love which makes satisfaction for our sins.
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans. This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth. I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
Excellent video. The underlying problem with Protestant (especially reformed but see also Luther's snow-covered dungheap) soteriology is that it misunderstands the Law as forensic rather than didactic. Of course, secular law is both - it proscribes certain acts and it sets forth punishments for committing said acts. However, there is also an underlying message - this act is wrong. We see this in the requirement (at least the requirement in Western legal systems) for the sentence to be proportional to the offense; speeding gets punished with a fine but murder with death because murder is significantly more evil than speeding and the different prescribed penalties for different crimes evidence the didactic nature of the law. The forensic part of the law exists because the world is fallen. Law, as a governing system, exists because people are estranged from God so that even if a man is unwilling to conduct himself according to its teachings, he can nevertheless be forced to conduct himself according to its power. There was no need for such law in Eden - paradise was ante-nomian (I know, it is a Latin-Greek portmanteau, but I couldn't help myself with the pun). God, therefore, has no need for the Law. To view the work of salvation in a forensic paradigm, therefore, is to deny that the Paschal mystery actually did anything. With forensic soteriology the Law was not fulfilled, it was simply applied; then God is playing mind games with Himself by applying "merits" earned here to persons over there - as though He were the court administrator allocating collected court fees to various departments though some budgetary process.
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans. This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth. I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
I used to be Calvinist. I left PCA back in 2020 due to Revoice controversy. God led me back to history of the Catholic Church and Church teachings of Scriptures and Sacred Tradition. Getting rid of Calvinist glasses is difficult yet I did. PSA along with TULIP ideas of Calvin are Gnostic in nature. I honestly turn off by Calivinist pride and arrogance. I once ask my Calvinist friend which church in Protestantism is true church, he said local church is true church. I found that to be unsatisfactory in light of Bible and history.
I already start on my journey to Catholic Church hopefully I get one one rcia that teach about Catholicism not about James Martin views or director disagreeing with some of Church dogmas. My previous rcia director said he was surprised that his liberalism don’t scare me away.
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans. This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth. I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
This argument makes sense if one ignores the entire Old Testament and early Christians' use of Old Testament scripture to explain the salvific work of Jesus the Messiah. (Yes, there were other ways that the scripture writers describe the divine mystery of this salvation as well: new birth in Christ, adoption, marriage, court of justice, etc.) The church fathers, such as St. Anselm, wrote extensively on God taking atonement into his own hands on behalf of humanity. Even today, the atonement is written into the Eucharistic liturgies. But of course, such concepts as sin and the need for reconciliation with God offend the modern mind.
@@EmbracingTradition100 God commands us to do things he himself does not do. We cannot for example command all things to worship us as God does. The reason for this is God has a unique place of authority and worth-and when we bring down God to our level and make him equal to us, we make an idol.
ALL other theories of atonement, and I do mean ALL, can only have meaning if derived from the ideas of sin and its punishment. WHY are we even in this mess? Why does God have to FIX anything at all? What is it God is even fixing? Without a thorough understanding of what sin and its punishment entails. you are lost in the water, you are floundering. The ONLY reason that makes any sense for God to become a man and die, to save the world, forgive sins, defeat death, defeat the devil, be a good influence, establish his government, and ransom everyone back, is this: The punishment of sin creates all the problems, and sin must be fully judged for God to redeem. Jesus judges sin on the Cross, and "payment" language permeates all of Scripture. *God became a man and died for one reason: to suffer the punishment sin deserves.* Here's the deal: God can defeat the devil and death without becoming a man and dying; why does he need to do it that way? *Makes no sense.* God can influence people and display his government without becoming a man and dying; why does he need to do it that way? *Makes no sense.* God can ransom people back and prove himself innocent, without becoming a man and dying; why does he need to do it that way? *Makes no sense.* Ever heard the saying, "There's no such thing as a free lunch?" Or how about, "A shortcut seldom is?" We know, even if the lunch comes to us free, someone, somewhere paid for it. And it is interesting just how much Scripture uses "payment" language in both the OT and the NT, this is very significant. But what is essentially being said by denying PSA is: *Jesus can pay for us, without really paying.* That's the argument, logically, from the anti-PSA crowd. It's not about God being angry, we already know there are instances of this. It's not about God punishing God, or breaking up the Trinity, or suffering an eternity of wrath, we know all things are possible for God, it's a relational not ontological break, an infinite being can suffer in finite time what a finite being can suffer infinitely, God can experience himself negatively, none of those are real problems. It's about *the holiness of God demanding punishment for sin.* And yet if all we emphasize is "God is all love" language, we deny a very vital, essential, and integral part of God, his justice. God is not *just* love. Else there would be no punishment, no judgment, no hell, no wrath anywhere at all, no diseases, viruses, pain, suffering, torture, abuse, neglect, unfairness, loneliness, sadness, unhappiness, violence, evil. God is not just love. If God were JUST love-think of it-God would allow anybody to do anything. God would not have enemies, if he were JUST love. God would send Satan flowers every morning and make him a fresh cup of coffee, if God were JUST love. God would never rebuke or warn or threaten anyone, if God were JUST love. There would be nothing painful or confusing or offensive or hard, if God were JUST love. _If God were JUST love, there would be no need to punish sin.... ever._ Now there are those who try to change the word punishment with a watered down version they just call "consequences." But this is just a semantic game removing the moral guilt element inherent in committing an evil action. If I trip walking down some stairs, that's a consequence of my actions, but there is no morally wrong aspect to what I did, there is no guilt. If we just redefine "if you do something evil and have something bad happen to you as a result of what you deserve" with the term "consequence," all we did was put a new word to the same meaning as "punishment." What is being attempted here, is removing moral guilt from sinful actions, and a removal of God's rightful acting role as Judge and dispenser of justice, as if "karma" takes over the job from God. So what we see here, is that people who deny PSA, are denying an essential attribute of God: *God's hatred for sin, God's necessary judgment on sin.* So they "rewrite" the Cross to be about anything BUT judging sin. _The Cross is about God being willing to show he will suffer._ *But not judgment on sin.* _The Cross is about God being a super nice fella' who is willing to get beat up and killed._ *But not judgment on sin.* _The Cross is about God showing he's in charge and governs the world._ *But not judgment on sin.* _The Cross is about God beating up the devil and giving him a big black eye._ *But not judgment on sin.* _The Cross is about God defeating death and giving creation a brand new chance._ *But not judgment on sin!* _The Cross is about Jesus being a great example to us, and inspiring us to die like him._ *But not judgment... on our sins.* See how that tricky "swapparoo" happens in this shell game, where we sneak out one of God's essential attributes? Anti-PSA advocates, like those who deny the Trinity, like to claim there is no verse to support God has to judge sin with wrath on his Son. But, like the Trinity, there are clear and obvious deductions we cannot escape from, and God expects us to make deductions in the Bible. There is no verse that says *God skips over justice.* There is no verse that says *God will leave sin unpunished.* And yet they try to take verses that express God's forgiveness won through the Cross and through Jesus' suffering, and neuter and rip out the actual sacrificial element of Christ that is made to suffer for the sins of the world, as if God can just skip over his own holiness! _Anti-PSA is a spirital "free lunch."_ The Law doesn't bring wrath under this scenario, because Jesus never really has to pay for our sins. But the whole reason Jesus said he came, the cup of redemption in his blood for the forgiveness, the basis of the ransom, was the true actual substitution in our place. "The Law brings wrath," but it's not true, if we all sinned against the Law, yet there was no wrath against our sins, it all just magically disappears without honoring God's holiness. That's striking at the very CORE of the Gospel, the DEEPEST and MOST CENTRAL reason Christ came to die, to die in our place, to suffer what we should have gotten. Not less-God's integrity uses equal weights and measures. There's a great advertisement for sugar I once saw, it is short and gets your attention: *"Sugar. There is no substitute."* Now we all know they are always trying to find a substitute for sugar, because everyone has a sweet tooth. But there is a substance and authenticity that an artificial substitute just never has to the original. What we are being offered here, is a spiritual "artificial substitute" for the punishment of our sins. Jesus does not have to really fulfill the Law's punishment, he doesn't really have to pay, he just has to physically die the first death, and never the second. All other theories of the atonement derive from Jesus paying the penalty for sin. Jesus paying a ransom, Jesus conquering death, Jesus conquering the devil, Jesus being a a good moral influence, Jesus conquering sin, Jesus redeeming the suffering and imperfections of creation. All these bad things that need redeeming all came from the creation's rebellion, all these things came from the original sins, all these things are curses and judgments that came as a consequence of what each of our sin deserves- There is no "problem" Jesus "solves" that is not in some way connected to "sin"!! The atonement of Jesus Christ is not just a good example, a legal loophole, fighting the bad guys, or doing a good deed for humanity. The atonement of Jesus Christ and all the good things that come from it are based in one thing, the Law bringing wrath. Jesus is judged with the consequences of what sinning against a holy God deserves on our behalf. Christ suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, to bring us to God. He made him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. The Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all, it pleased the Lord to bruise him, his soul became a guilt offering. He takes the bullet, he takes the fall, he takes the exact punishment we deserve. *That's the Gospel.*
One question…if true justice is about paying the penalty how do you forgive as God forgives? If God requires retribution to fulfill his said justice… how does that play out for us, who are to be like God? I don’t forgive my children by exacting punishment from somewhere for their sins. It doesn’t work biblically and it doesn’t work in reality. PSA advocates claim retribution is THE GOSPEL. It’s actually ANTI GOSPEL. It’s antithetical to all that the Gospel entails and all that it requires from us in the way we imitate God.
Great video. In Genesis 8, verse 21, after the great flood god says "never again will I strike down every living being as I have done." Book of Jonah, god is "slow to anger abounding in kindness, repenting of anger.
Another great video Candice with very thoughtful arguments. I agree with your overall conclusions on PSA. Perhaps a good topic to clarify is God’s immutability, as this can be defined in different ways. For example, does immutability really mean that God can't change his mind? I would argue no - as God is patient with us in coming to repentance. God's immutability is not incompatible with Christ, through his redemptive sacrifice, being the "one mediator" for mankind. Equally, Christ being the "one mediator" does not equate to PSA. We have numerous examples of intercession in the Bible where God responds with love/mercy; Abraham on behalf of Sodom; Moses on behalf of Israel, Samuel on behalf of Israel, Mary asking Jesus for wine at the wedding on Cana, and more. Perhaps, these are prototypes for Christ's intercessionary sacrifice. Intercession is an act of love and mercy. For me, Jesus' sacrifice on the cross was a loving intercessory act given under the Father's merciful plan and provision to turn us to Him. I think this is the Gospel message - not PSA. Perhaps, I'm nit-picking on your immutability argument a little. 😃 But, overall great job in addressing the challenges inherent in the legalism of PSA.
Thank you for such a thoughtful comment! I think you’re right! I have a difficulty getting everything as clear as I’d like but I really love what you said and I agree with you.
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans. This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth. I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
@@Yjohanna You are conflating different issues. Jesus' suffering and conquering death for our redemption does not equate to PSA. The notion that God had to extract a pound of flesh from Christ in retribution for our sins, aka PSA, contradicts the gospel message that God saved us through grace and that grace is a free gift to us from God. PSA contends that a legal price was paid and that redemption is transactional - and thus PSA opposes the message of God's grace given to us as a free gift. Also - PSA is a man-made tradition from the reformation that misinterprets the Bible. It was not taught by the apostles, early church fathers or any branches of the church prior to the reformation. You are correct that Jesus died so that all can be saved, but this is not PSA. The suffering and death that Jesus suffered was inflicted by man - the Jews who rejected Him - and not by the Father.
@@lisnafulla your wrong, God knows everything and He allowed it fully knowing, Jesus also willingly did the sacrifice for all of our sins. If you are not acknowledging that fact you are purely deceive, for God knows everything including the pain and suffering Jesus needs to suffer, but for Jesus loves us so much that He did not want us all to be in hell, He willingly became the lamb for all of us and His blood paid the price for our sins. This is stated in the Holy Scripture and it is the infallible truth.
@@lisnafulla I did not actually watch the vid earlier and commented abruptly. I admit I was mistaken im sorry. I agree with your statement regarding PSA.
Catholic here. I am curious to know if the speaker has done any research on this topic from traditional Catholic and Eastern Orthodox sources. I’ve lectured at length through the Latin and Greek Fathers of the Church and they do not reduce atonement to what the speaker here says. This is a caricature and a lack of being rooted in the sources. What I am hearing here is a reductionism of the full Christian teaching.
Thanks for commenting Erik! I have appreciated your videos and thoughts. I have not attempted to answer against PSA from all angles but only from the perspective of what I have been taught my entire life in Protestant and Reformed circles. This is more of a critique of the pop level PSA as is articulated by predominant preachers such as John MacArthur and RC Sproul. I am sure that there are other articulations that are more careful and historic in their understanding.
@ thank you. I’ve been looking into views on atonement for awhile now. I do not see them as mutually exclusive. Instead I think many have great points and complement one another. If I had to pick, I appreciate Christus Victor the most. I can get behind random too, but I think some take it too far saying a random was paid directly to Satan.
Pretty dang good framing of STA. However, I would love to see the Catholic view of sacrifice ironed out. That’s a topic that I don’t believe apostolic Christians address enough.
I would like to see it ironed out as well. Joe Heschmeyer does the best job that I’ve found so far. His channel is shamelesspopery you should check him out.
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans. This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth. I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
Thank you for posting this, very helpful from someone who does not come from this background and having always been confused as to why does anyone need to be punished, why can God not just forgive a person. I am not discounting the consequences of my actions, but I do not believe "God" is or "has" to punish me for every single so called sin. I asked these people if that is true, just definitionally that does not sound like mercy AT ALL, I get a word salad of scriptures and long explanations.
Most Christians agree that Christ's redemptive sacrifice on the cross made salvation available for all men. Thus, redemption was and is universal. However, salvation itself is conditioned on our faith - and therefore is not universal. A problem with PSA - the notion that Jesus paid the legal penalty for EVERYONE - is that not everyone is saved. PSA doctrine implies that God accepts Christ's penal substitution for some - but not for others. Since not everyone is saved by PSA, the logical extension of PSA is that God reneges on Christ's penal substitutionary atonement for some sinners. If PSA were true, then all would be saved. PSA, therefore, upsurps the teaching that we are saved by grace through faith. If we were saved by PSA, then faith by free will would be unnecessary. Calvinists overcome this dilemna with the notion of the Elect, that those who are saved and those whom are damned has been predetermined by God. Put another way, the Reformed notion of determinism is a theological error that is rooted in the error of PSA.
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans. This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth. I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
@@Yjohannatradition cam be twisted? Tradition is something that remains and I'm as Eastern Orthodox hold to apostles tradition and their successors. Inflatable understanding of Bible by your own is a dangerous myth. It's exactly there you can twist understanding, not holding to ancient tradition of understanding on what we have consensus patrum.
@hakooplayplay3212 how can reading the Bible be dangerous? Do you even know the existence of the Holy Spirit? The Holy Spirit will guide you if you seek Him Jesus in your readings. Traditions on the other hand can be twisted because they are pass on by people. May I ask How do you enter Heaven??
@@Yjohanna Even the devil quoted from Scripture. You need to stop accusing people of being evil and recognize that YOU don't have an infallible understanding of Scripture. Labeling those who disagree with you as evil is unpersuasive and certainly doesn't reflect the fruit of the Spirit. Your comments seem to be based on your tradition, which is a fallible non-apostilic tradition. Unless you are claiming to be a prophet, your personal interpretation of Scripture is not infallible. Please don't condescend others telling them to read their Bible - as if they haven't or don't. If Sola Scriptura were true, we wouldn't have the thousands of different denominations and disunity within Protestantism - all claiming prophetic interpretation from the Holy Spirit despite their disagreements on fundamental doctrines (e.g. Trinity, Baptism, Determinism, Real Presence, KJVonly, etc. etc.) Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to protect the apostilic tradition, so maybe think twice before attacking what the Bible declared as the "pillar and foundation of truth" with superficial platitudes.
14:23 It’s not that “in order for God to love us He needs some form of payment” but it’s that BECAUSE God loves us He provides this form of payment. Redeem means a purchase. I think you are getting some things like this confused. However, I do find myself agreeing with some of your points made… which perhaps present flaws in the reformed thought. Jesus did become a curse for us. He did become sin for us. He did bare our sins in his body. He was forsaken. “My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me?” He didn’t cry out in agony in response to the devil… but forsaken by God (IN OUR PLACE!) Isaiah 53:10 KJVS Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. As I stated earlier, Jesus willingly accepted this.
What did Jesus accomplish on the cross if he didn’t receive the just punishment for our sins? It’s because Jesus was the substitute that Christians have forgiveness. Jesus drank the cup of God’s just wrath and His blood was poured out for the forgiveness of sins. The whole Bible points to substitutionary atonement (a ram was provided in place of Isaac, the day of atonement in Leviticus). The whole sacrificial system in the Bible points to this
Well first of all the wages of our sin is death… he took that on himself and defeated death so that we can also be raised with Him…secondly He defeated the powers of darkness and made a path for us to overcome those powers as well… If you believe he received the “just punishment” we deserve, do you believe he suffered eternal punishment in Hell?
For God loved the world as so, he gave his only-begotten Son (before the foundationsof the world) , that whoever believes (and obeys) in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him. He who believes in him is not condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God. And this is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does what is true comes to the light, that it may be clearly seen that his deeds have been wrought in God. - John 3:16-21
PSA goes farther back in the western tradition than you think. St Augustine and St Anselm described the core ideas: original sin, total depravity, infant depravity, et cetera.
I’m a catechumen. In RCIA. Protestant for three years. God is good. I was obsessed with theology (as I can tell your passionate as well) I will be following your channel closely. You’re very learned and well studied. Dude. I have so so so much to UNLEARN. It’s actually daunting to think about it. Say all that to say. Thanks so much for your channel. I pray it grows and that you keep at it. Your talented. And people need these videos. God bless. Thanks again. seriously
Thank you for such encouragement! I’m glad that it is helping! That is the whole reason I’m passionate about it. I want to be a blessing to people! Thank you for your support! 😌
@@EmbracingTradition100 Thank you for helping me recognize a gap in my understanding. Full disclosure, I'm EO so I don't think I'll be able to accept his teaching either, but I'm eager now to learn more about it.
@@david6ravy well honestly, the Catholic Church has not made any atonement dogma. I have problems with anselm and don’t hold to it. I prefer the orthodox understanding of atonement. For now I am free to do so.
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans. This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth. I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
@@Yjohanna I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds. Light of Light, Very God of Very God, of one essence with the Father, by Whom all things were made. Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried. The third day He rose again according to the Scriptures. I just believe what the Orthodox Church teaches and has taught for nearly 2,000 years, regarding these things. The Church, clothed throughout the world as in purple and fine linen with the blood of martyrs, who produced and preserved the Holy Scriptures, who to this day produces holy men and women bearing witness to the Truth. I do not follow the traditions of 16th century innovators like John Calvin.
I believe there is a softer view of PSA that is thoroughly traditional. It doesn't have to do with God punishing Christ insofar as "he's gotta whip somebody!" and that Christ loses his communion with God and becomes an object of God's hatred, but rather Christ mystically bears the suffering of mankind which is essence is a punishment due to sin -- and he uses that "punishment" to conquer the sin which occasioned it. Traditional Catholic sources -- from the fathers to the scholastics -- acknowledge this. St. John Chrysostom, commentary on 2 Cor 5:21: "And that you may learn what a thing it is, consider this which I say. If one that was himself a king, beholding a robber and malefactor under punishment, gave his well-beloved son, his only-begotten and true, to be slain; and transferred the death and the guilt as well, from him to his son, (who was himself of no such character,) that he might both save the condemned man and clear him from his evil reputation" St. Thomas Aquinas, commentary on Galatians 3:13: "For Christ freed us from punishment by enduring our punishment and our death which came upon us from the very curse of sin... He was truly cursed by God, because God decreed that He endure this punishment in order to set us free." St. Alphonsus Liguori, The Passion and Death of Jesus Christ: “Thus all the wrath of God, which He had conceived against our sins, poured itself out upon the person of Jesus Christ; and thus we must interpret what the Apostle said, ‘He was made a curse for us’; that is, the object of all the curses deserved by our sins.”
@@EmbracingTradition100 I don't think it's an "either-or" matter, either. Each theory has a truth to it. The atonement is a mystical reality, no one idea is going to exhaust its transcendent truth. So I believe we should take them all into account, Satisfaction, Christus Victor, Ransom, AND the Catholic PSA.
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans. This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth. I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
@Yjohanna We’ve all heard this empty Protestant claim - “Jesus did everything so I can do nothing”. That, my friend, is profoundly unbiblical. We are meant to cooperate with God’s grace, with the Holy Spirit, and avoid sin, avoid temptation and grow in virtue. Thankfully more people are actually reading the entire Bible and realizing the truth of the Catholic faith.
@@pianoatthirty indeed what you say is correct on the part that we should also do are part as followers of Jesus and read the Bible because these facts are common sense unless in your denomination it is not. Many people on The New Testament memorize the entirety of the old testament, but are hypocrites, they failed to be guided by the Holy Spirit. "many are called but few are chosen"
@@Yjohanna False. Jesus died so that we might be saved. But we do have to get on the rescue ship. You, on the other hand having seen the rescue ship are running around the island shouting "I am saved" and doing nothing else.
@BensWorkshop I get your point, and I can assure you that I believe in this scripture "faith without works is dead". Why do you put "might" there, Jesus' sacrifice is absolute so if you received Him surely you will enter heaven because Jesus Himself is the qualification John 14:6 "I am the way". There is this called being "born again" you can't enter if you are not one as it is stated, and only by receiving Jesus can saved you, and by being "born again" your actions and works will follow Jesus naturally because He is in your Heart, why do you put "might" there, you can't enter Heaven because you doubt Him. I believe that to live here on earth good works and denying of our selves to Christ is the way to live while we are still Alive but to enter Heaven, Jesus is enough not your good works because you are not qualified no matter how saintly you are if you don't have Jesus.
Revelation 1:5 - And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood. Hebrews 9:22 - And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
Westerner here, THANK YOU for this message, have forwarded it to a lovely couple who are on fire for Christ but who have fallen victim to the heresies of the deceptive modernists. Tenete Traditiones sister, God bless.
It is not either or when it comes to the atonement it is that God loves us but it is also that God has anger at sin..If you paint God as a God of love and forgiveness only then you are missing why God judges sin and condemns people to hell.
@BensWorkshop She covered the aspect of God's love and forgiveness and gave the example of the prodigal son. I never got anything regarding how God punishes sin or how Christ bore our punishment on the cross.
I think another problem with this view is it makes God the Father, the Executioner of Jesus rather than Jesus being the high priest that offers himself. To be sure there are verses the consent to support penal substitution and other verses that seem to contradict this. Ultimately, the atonement and the cross are mysteries that we can spend our whole lives entering into. I don't think any of us are going to really have a completely coherent understanding of it until we stand before God face to face. Until then, we will try to muddle through with the guidance of the Bride of Christ: the one, Holy, Catholic and apostolic church.
12:00 Jesus did take a beating… and although you may try and explain that away by stating it was accomplished at the hands of evil men… does it escape your notice that this was by the predeterminate will of God the Father? Acts 2:23, 4:27-28. Does it also escape your notice that Jesus willingly laid down his life and could have foregone it? John 10:18 and Matthew 26:53.
No doubt - Jesus' death and Resurrection was part of God's plan. But this does not prove PSA. There is a difference between God the Father allowing Jesus to suffer death for our sins at the hands of man, and the doctrine of PSA where the Father is inflicting wrath on His Son.
@@lisnafulla, Jesus did become a curse for us. He did become sin for us. He did bare our sins in his body. He was forsaken. "My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me?" He didn't cry out in agony in response to the devil... but forsaken by God (IN OUR PLACE!) Isaiah 53:10 KJVS Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. As I stated earlier, Jesus willingly accepted this.
@@lisnafulla , she’s refuting the idea of God’s justice meaning somebody has to take a beating for God to be forgiving. What I’m saying in response is 1) that Jesus did take a beating that led to our forgiveness which refutes her refuting (because God orchestrated it for our forgiveness). Let me also just say, God could have sent Jesus to just say we’re forgiven… God didn’t have to orchestrate the beating… BUT God did (Isa. 53:10) and 2) it was God whom Jesus said had forsaken Him. (Isa. 53:10 and Matt. 27:46)
@@70_X_7 Agreed. But this does not prove PSA. It only proves that Christ suffered the curse of death at the hands of men, so that man could turn to repentance through Jesus. Jesus in His humanity suffered without divine intervention (My God my God, why have you forsaken me). God did not interrupt Christ's suffering; rather the Father was pleased with Christ's obedience and self-sacrifice for the purpose of our redemption. The verses you offer do not prove or even suggest PSA, except by misinterpretation. The Greek and Hebrew texts are better understood that God permitted Christ to be bruised - not that God himself directly inflicted the bruising.
@@70_X_7 Correct. She refutes the PSA notion that God's mercy and forgiveness are based on retributive justice. You are correct in that Jesus did suffer death and this led to our redemption (and redemption through Jesus was part of God's divine plan). But this does not equate to PSA. God sent Jesus to conquer death on our behalf out of love, mercy and grace, and out of forgiveness - not based on a retributive and forensic understanding of "justice". PSA twists God's grace to say that Jesus had to suffer the wrath of the Father in order to turn the Father away from wrath and anger. No. Jesus' sacrifice was purposed to turn MAN away from sin and towards repentance - not to turn the Father from wrath to mercy. The Father wanted to extend His children mercy from the very beginning. However, I do agree that Jesus' sacrifice was intercessionary (the Father was well pleased). The wrath that Jesus suffered was that of the Jews who unjustly punished Him. The wrath Christ innocently suffered was also the curse of sin, i.e. death. Put another way, Jesus suffered wrath and punishment at the hands of sinful men and not at the hands of the Father. The Father merely allowed it in the same way that Jesus obediently allowed it even though both the Father and Son could have interrupted Christ's suffering at any time. They didn't so Jesus could show us that He has conquered death and so that man would turn to repentance.
“Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.” Romans 5:9-11 KJV
The difference in understanding is that that verse doesn’t say that Jesus bore God’s wrath, it says that because of his blood, we will be justified, “aka” made righteous and by being justified we will be saved from the WRATH TO COME…..When we were enemies, not God was against us, we were against him…
Thank you for these videos from the reformed perspective. Even before becoming Catholic I have been staunchly against “reformed theology/Calvinism”. Your videos help educate so we can properly combat those heresies.
This is a good evaluation of PSA. However, not all protestants are Calvinists (you only quoted and referenced Calvinist/reformed protestants) nor do they all affirm PSA. This is a doctrine that definitely needs to be addressed, but it is unfair to imply that this is what all protestants or evangelicals believe.
I am speaking in very broad generalities and I said that in the video. I would say it is the majority view even among non Calvinists. Thank you for your comment 😊
@EmbracingTradition100 Unfortunately that is very true and I agree completely with all the arguments you made against PSA. My issue is that many religious channels become echo chambers because we only listen to those in our own camps and therefore the only things we ever learn about what others believe is the “broad generalities” we hear and we don’t actually understand what issues are at play in the faith traditions of others. God bless.
I read it as I have seen Catholic and orthodox describe it, that Christ is not being punished by God but that that is how we perceive what is going on. It’s not true. He’s bearing our infirmities but to us we think he’s being punished by God. I encourage looking at sources that aren’t evangelical or Calvinist for an alternate interpretation than the one commonly given in the Protestant world. 😊 Blessings!
I'm not pro-PSA, but God is immutable and doesn't have emotions: I don't think that's according to scripture either? God is above all love. Saying that God is angry about sin and not sinners already contradicts your point of God not having emotions.
I tried to make the point that I was using human language to describe it. I didn’t mean to imply that God was actually experiencing those emotions in a human way. But it is the language he gives to explain what our sin is doing.
Penal Substitution is Plain in Isaiah 53 and I don't see any other coherent sense of the whole of scripture. Isaiah 53 states that the Servant bore other's griefs, was smitten, afflicted by God, That he was pierced for Our transgressions and crushed for Our iniquities and upon him was the Chastisement that brought us peace. This same section was cited in the book of Acts 8:26-40 concerns a slice of Isaiah 53 as it refers to this figure. We must do Justice to the Biblical Data and acknowledge Jesus as the Rightful Figure who was cut off from God for sake of God's people.
Isaiah 53 is misinterpreted as a prooftext for PSA. It is true that Christ suffered inequities. It is true that Jesus allowed this to happen as He said himself that He had the power to command angels to stop it. It is true that the Father - and the Truine God - planned for Jesus to become incarnate, suffer for our sins, and conquer death for our redemption. All this was by Grace. The Father permitted this to happen, just as Jesus did. This is what the text reads in the Greek and Hebrew translations. But there is a difference between the Father permitting man to crucify Jesus and the PSA notion that the Father is the one inflicting suffering and wrath onto his Son. There are many biblical examples of God using man's bad acts to serve God's divine purpose. This does not mean that God is the person who performs those bad acts. God the Father did not crucify Jesus; just like Jesus, the Father merely allowed it to happen so as to serve his divine purpose of redemption and for Christ to be our mediator.
@@lisnafullait sounds like we disagree about semantics. It was the will of God that Christ, he who was innocent, bare the sins of the people, and the means by which the death of God's only son for sake of redeeming the world did not acquit those who killed him of their sin nor justify it. God predestined the cross (Acts 2:23, 4:27-28) but the hands were those of lawless men. Ultimately, to deny PSA is to deny the necessity of Christ's innocent death in the place of sinners. God isn't Allah to which he will be appeased by one's bare intercession. Blood is required for forgiveness of sins. (Hebrews 9:22)(Hebrews 13:11-12)
@@garchomp-if7514 To deny PSA is not to deny that God was pleased with (or allowed) Jesus's sacrifice on the cross. That is a false binary. PSA denies God's sovereign divine power to forgive without retribution. If I can forgive my kids/wife/neighbor without seeking retribution, why would I assign an inferior ability to God?
@@lisnafullaGod requires blood for forgiveness of sins. Without blood there is no forgiveness of sins. Again, I do not take the view common to Muslims that God can essentially say "it's good bro" without punishing sin. To uphold such a view fails to take account of God's character. God in islam is the unknowable arbitrary will, having mercy on some, showing wrath to others The soul that sins will die, and the blood atonement of Christ on our behalf upholds God's character as a God of Mercy & Justice.
It would be helpful if you understood PSA. PSA is not about God being a “big angry meanie.” It is an affirmation of Absolute Divine Simplicity, God is (Just) since He is Just, He must dispense justice. The wages of sin is death, if He just let us go, He would be an Unjust judge. If someone breaks into your home and robs you, and the judge just let that person go, you’d be livid. God is Justice itself, without Him there is no Justice, the wages of sin is death so the wages of your sins must be paid for. Now say if someone paid the bail of the man who broke into your home, he can be set free. Christ did this for us on the cross, He paid the wages of sin, willingly. If we accept His payment for sin, it has been paid. It has nothing to do with God being a big angry meany, it has to do with God being Just ontologically.
Christs life, death, and resurrection is about reconciliation. God became man, that man can become god. From the womb to the resurrection God became man to restore humanity to union with God. The cross is not just about the Father punishing Christ on our behalf, that is entirely ridiculous. Christ became the Passover lamb that humanity can partake in to be freed from the bondage of sin. I won’t go into the issue of ADS, but the fact that you are attempting to use ADS as apart of your argument is utterly ridiculous for several reasons. But primarily, the primary source we can look to for ADS is Thomas Aquinas, if you’ve ever read “what is redemption” by Francis De Sales, you’ll realize Thomas Aquinas did not teach PSA. So unless you want to claim that the reformers were better philosophers than Thomas Aquinas, making an argument from ADS is pointless. You have to prove that the cross is primarily about Gods wrath being poured out on Christ, that’s the centerpiece of ADS. And that isn’t in scripture. Further, what does God do when Moses offers himself as a sacrifice to appease Gods wrath for Gods people? “But now, if you will forgive their sin-but if not, please blot me out of your book that you have written.” But the Lord said to Moses, “Whoever has sinned against me, I will blot out of my book.” Exodus 32:32-33 ESV Moses says “God let me who is innocent die for them”, God says “no I don’t work that way.” But all of a sudden, when it comes to Christ God does work that way? No. God doesn’t punish the innocent on behalf of the guilty.
The wages of sin is death. He took that upon himself. We escape the wrath of God through the cross only in so much as we are saved from our sins and thus do not face it. Christ didn’t take the wrath of God. He took death sin, hell and the devil and destroyed them all. What justice is there in God if the display of it is the ultimate injustice. It’s illogical and immoral.
@@EmbracingTradition100 would you like to elaborate on how Christ willfully paying the wages of sin on the cross is the “ultimate injustice?” Are you under the impression Jesus didn’t need to pay the wages of sin on the cross? Could we have been saved in some other way?
What is forgiveness. What is God’s forgiveness. Recall he said your sin I will remember no more. How’s that possible?……What happened when you forgive?….you affirm that the ‘me’ that was offended is ‘no more’, the me you see, you haven’t offended.
PSA as an explicit theology has been around since Anselm. It's roots go back through the Church Fathers, the NT to the OT, to Isaiah: "6 We all went astray like sheep; we all have turned to our own way; and the Lord has punished him for the iniquity of us all.... 10Yet the Lord was pleased to crush him severely. When you make him a guilt offering, he will see his seed, he will prolong his days, and by his hand, the Lord’s pleasure will be accomplished. (Isa.53.6-10 CSB)
It comes from a wrong translation in this case. It should be "God is pleased in he who was tortured; He would want to save him from beatings"(I'm translating from memory of Polish version cited by Bible scholar Wacław Hryniewicz, so I might have made a mistake, but the general meaning of this passage was around that). Or just "The Lord wants to save him from beatings" as in Septuagint.
@romualdandrzejczak4093 The Jewish Tanakh translation says, "5But he was wounded because of our sins, Crushed because of our iniquities. He bore the chastisement that made us whole, And by his bruises we were healed. 6We all went astray like sheep, Each going his own way; And the LORD visited upon him The guilt of all of us.”
@@ike991963 The text is actually ambigouous(as noted by Hryniewicz indeed) and so it allows both readings. The one cited by me Hryniewicz sees as more in accordance with his theology- he thinks it would be unjust for God if He made His beloved servant suffer and was pleased with that.
Isaiah 53 is misinterpreted as a prooftext for PSA. It is true that Christ suffered inequities. It is true that Jesus allowed this to happen as He said himself that He had the power to command angels to stop it. It is true that the Father - and the Truine God - planned for Jesus to become incarnate, suffer for our sins, and conquer death for our redemption. All this was by Grace. The Father permitted this to happen, just as Jesus did. This is what the text reads in the Greek and Hebrew translations. But there is a difference between the Father permitting man to crucify Jesus and the PSA notion that the Father is the one inflicting suffering and wrath onto his Son. There are many biblical examples of God using man's bad acts to serve God's divine purpose. This does not mean that God is the person who performs those bad acts. God the Father did not crucify Jesus; just like Jesus, the Father merely allowed it to happen so as to serve his divine purpose of redemption and for Christ to be our mediator.
Great presentation on showing the evil of penal substitution. It truly is an untenable theory. I suggest that you do some research on Trinitarian inclusion theology because some of your other comments and understanding of grace and salvation and separation from God are off. Believing and confessing bring us to a place of awareness and experience of who we are as God’s children and our inheritance in Him, but the reality of that truth was completely done for us, to us, and as us, by Jesus Christ alone. Scripture tells us that we were redeemed, justified, reconciled and born again BY the blood, death and resurrection of Christ. In His incarnation, Jesus became humanity. We were crucified with Him, we rose with Him and we ascended with Him to heavenly places. The believing, confessing, sacraments, etc. bring the reality of that heavenly truth into our earthly experience. We were changed ontologically in and by Him, apart from our choice, believing and living it, is simply an expression in earth of what is already true in heaven. Thanks for sharing.
If Jesus didn't die on the cross in our place to appease God's wrath then why did Jesus have to die on the cross at all. Why did he simply not just forgive us?
He had to live, if he died to appease God's wrath, The trinity is shattered, and Christ is in hell, we are saved by his merits, the cross is about love, as PST literraly turns God into a mayan god that needs to drink blood.
Because you hae a view of Jesus as God only and does not count His humanity. God asks for our obedience and true repentance. Remember the story of Abraham looking over Sodom and Gommorah before it's destruction. Abraham pleads with God to spare it if there were 40, then 30, then 20, then 10 good people among the thousands living there. Picture that scenario (as the NT is the OT revealed) as the world and Jesus pleading with the Father and talks the Father down to finding just ONE good-person; would He spare the World. Jesus in His humanity was that ONE good person. His death on the Cross was that perfect faith and obedience without questioning it. That is what spared us. God revealing to us we are not totally depraved and there is some redeeming quality left in humanity to explain His work of saving us. God was not seeking His pound of flesh; but that perfect faith and obedience through the sometimes seemingly cruel and pointless suffering Jesus and we are ourselves face everyday.
@@recyclebin3798 What those who dismiss God's anger and judgement miss is our guilt We were guilty so the innocent died for the guilty the righteous for the unrighteous that we may be free from guilt(sin brings guilt) and aquited and declared righteous. God declares us innocent in a legal penal sense and we live out that reality through being conformed to the image of Christ.
@@39knights But Lot did not save the people of sodom and Gommorah he was just spared. So that analogy doesnt really work. Also my view does account for Jesus taking on humanity.
@@recyclebin3798 I didn't say Lot saved Sodom and Gomorrah. There were NONE found righteous in the city so they were destroyed. But why hasn't God destroyed humanity?? Because there is ONE righteous; and so we are redeemable nd God has spared the whole Earth. In a theology where God is out for blood; that is a terrible God. That is a specific heresy where the God of the OT was a bloodthirsty maniac and the NT God is a loving God. In either case the appeasement theology is a terrible theology based loosley on a very bad and extreme translation of 'paid the debt'. It is not a christian theology and has only appeared in the last century or so.
Stop looking for denominations. Denomination is from demon. All ism are sects. Protestanism, Calvinism, Orthodoxism, Catholicism, Mormonism, Jehovah witness. Read the bible, close your ears from religion, and pray to Jesus your only Saviour. Acts 2:38 (NET) Peter said to them, “Repent, and each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Colossians 2:8 8Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. *"Embracing tradition"*
@@EmbracingTradition100 I've told you that the KJV Bible is mathematically encoded by God. Whhat you do with that information is between you and God. Catholics talk alot about tradition, theology and philosophy. What about Scripture?
Did you say that god does not have emotions. I have to play this again to see if i herd it right. Maybe not. Check mate - Ohh yes you did. How hilarious. This is a joke. Please take a step back and let others do theologi.
@@EmbracingTradition100 Yes it is. The bible tells us over and over again that God feels and are angry or glad. If classic ortodox doctrine tells us that is a lie. >Then its a joke and you should rebuke it. Sola scriptura!!!
Great. Now everybody should read "Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul" by Simon Gathercole to hear both sides of the debate and make up their mind where they will stand.
How a person can read the entire Bible and not become Catholic is beyond me. Everything in Protestantism rests on cherry-picking scripture to create this bizarre narrative that completely dismisses free will and human accountability. “Jesus did everything so I can do nothing”. What utter nonsense! Please keep doing what you’re doing!
How can they not become Catholic? How about a complete lack of the bullshit dogmas the church tries to bind to everyones conscience.
Cherry-picking always leads to the pits. Quote mining yields only fool's gold.
You are quickly becoming one of my favorite Catholic podcasts. The simple way you explain things has a way of sanding off the rough edges so that I can better understanding things. Keep up the great work.
Thank you so much for such encouraging feedback! That is so kind and really made my day! 😌God bless you.
I'm a lifelong catholic Ive never been exposed until now to this strange idea by Calvin of God and the Son being at odds its completely unbiblical show me where it says Abba and Jesus are at odds
Really appreciate this video..Christus Victor is widely considered to be the dominant theory for most of the historical Church...Penal Substitionary theory is a novelty of the Protestant Reformation..
Thank you! 😊
Well done. Glad to see more content exposing PSA.
Thank you! I’ve listened to your series twice now! I owe a lot to you as there isn’t a lot out there who cover this. 😊 I’m super stoked that you commented! 😃
@EmbracingTradition100 thanks for the kind words and encouragement
@@IdolKiller I like what Dr Harwood has to say on it in his Theology, "After surveying the biblical material on the person and work of Christ as well as reviewing the various atonement models, I agree with Charles E. Hill, “It is easy to see why the New Testament’s reflections on the atoning work of Christ are so astonishingly rich and complex. No single description, whether by metaphor or by plain speech, can comprehend the fullness of the revelation of what God has done in Christ in reconciling the world to himself.”43 Rather than selecting one atonement model to the exclusion of the others, each model should be considered as one facet of a multifaceted diamond.44
Harwood, Adam. Christian Theology: Biblical, Historical, and Systematic . Lexham Academic. Kindle Edition.
@catharsis77 I'd agree as far as it pertains to the Models held by the Early Church, but disagree as to Anselmian Atonement Theories as they reject forgiveness and claim God was the problem rather than man, as well as splitting the Trinity
@@IdolKiller Yeah, that wasn't one of the 8 that Harwood discussed. I don't agree with what I just read about it either. Edit: Correction, he does mention it but not to the extent you explained.
You might like this ancient church father's saying, "It wasn't the cross of Christ that secured the love of God, but it was the love of God that secured the cross of Christ." John Chrysostom.
Penal Substitution doesn't deny this?
Yes! Who has reversed this? Which spirit who roams and patrols the earth?
Penal Substituion is only possible from a pagan perspective.
The genetic fallacy of claiming any similarity means origin does not work.
Pagans pray, so prayer came from Paganism? Pagans believe in a spiritual realm, so a spiritual realm is Pagan? It makes no sense.
The "reform" began the gradual secularization of the faith.
Honesty, this kind of content about penal substitution is what originally got me curious about Orthodoxy. I still tried to stay Protestant for a while.
But seeing that the cross was just a simple legalistic transaction in Protestantism was my starting point.
Ironic that I always called Catholics and Orthodox legalistic when the two primary reformers were students of law and created legalistic theology.
Yes! So true. Thank you for sharing your thoughts! Calvin in particular was obsessed with legalities and built the core of his doctrines on it.
Here's a Wayne Grudem quote from his Systematic Theology (2020), page 707.
"It is important to notice that in both of these categories [of Christ's work] the primary emphasis and THE PRIMARY INFLUENCE of Christ's work of redemption IS NOT ON US BUT ON GOD the Father…In both cases, the atonement is viewed as objective, that is, something that has primary influence directly on God. Only secondarily does it have application to us, and this is only because there was a definite event in the relationship between God the Father and God the Son that secured our salvation." [All caps added by me.]
PSA is primarily intended to change God, not us. It only "applies" to us. PSA insists that any mandatory change on our part, even out of faith in our hearts, is works. It is a distortion of the biblical message and tells you a lot of why PSA preachers struggle so much with sin.
Thank you for sharing! This is exactly what it teaches. A change happens in God. 😌
Great post! To your point, PSA contends that we are saved by "works of the law", aka forensic/penal judgment, and not by Grace. God the Father is seen as a forensic judge constrained by the letter of the law, and not a spiritual judge who is abundant in grace.
@@lisnafulla Right. PSA has no genuine forgiveness or mercy. A debt can only be forgiven or mercy extended BEFORE it has been paid. After a debt has been fully paid there is no forgiveness or mercy that can possibly be granted.
It is almost Islamic.
Galatians 3:13: “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.’”
This does not even mean PST, it just means Christ fufilled the Law putting it to a end or change, as we still follow the law, what changed is how we follow it, which is by intention of Love or charity, instead of just obeying the law as a list of requirements as if we were forced servants, instead of voluntary ones
@@Onlyafool172 Where in your view explains that Christ (became) a curse (for us). Christ became something and it was done for us. If Christ became something namely a curse then how? In what sense? He did it for us what does that mean? Your explanation goes nowhere in explaining the strength of what is being suggested here.
@jotink1 if we read this verse litterraly it means Christ is a curse that curses us, and some how redeems us from another curse.
What this verse means is that Christ was tormented to free us from the torment of the law, which was his main menssage, because the law how the pharisees understood it, was the law for the law, basically the law was a bunch of requisites they must fufill, instead of something with a purpose, so they followed the law of flesh, which Paul is referencing here, the law of the flesh is fufilles externally as if God was your boss, thus you serve him as a slave, the law how Christ teaches us is a spiritual. Law, that is by intention of 1 loving God, and 2 loving thy neighboor as yourself, that you obey the law, hence why God is called The Father now, because we are his sons, we are not punished for slip ups, because as Paul says" I do the evil I dont want to and dont do the good I want to" this is his point on galantians, thats the curse lifted, rather than a wrath appeasing kill, it about calling us to be sons of God, and by the merits of his life which are superabundent (because he is perfectly obidient to God, and he is God) that we are saved, and on the cross his life fufilled the law , now its not by merits of deeds that we are called to the same sonship of Jesus so we can partake on his merits
@@jotink1 I wrote a gigantic essay explaing and TH-cam deleted it, lord have mercy
@@jotink1 because Yt deleted my comment I will just simplify it, basically this verse is talking about the Law, and how Christ even tho he followed the Law, by deturpation of it the pharisees still placed him on punishment, bur Christ saves us from the law by Revealing the true law, which is done by spirit, not by the flesh, and thats Paul's point here, the law how pharisees understood, was very much like the laws we have on society, they exist to not be broken, so the law is done externally not internally, because by ignoring what the law has as purpose which is sanctification, they would not strive for a true internal change to be United by God, so now we follow the law of the spirit, which was taught by Christ, we obey it because of Love, and to grow closer to him so we are not condemmed by slip ups, or sins we so fall because of our weakeness, but instead we are condemmed by what there is on our hearts. Basically according to pharisees we are slaves of the law, according to Christ we are Sons of God, and obey the law out of Love
Good job. Makes perfect sense. Thank you.
Thank you! 😊
Thank you for this video. I spent many years as a Protestant before coming home as a Catholic revert. This video made me realize that I have been still viewing the atonement as a penal substitution. The way God has been opening my eyes has been amazing to me as He unravels the Protestantism that had been engrained in me. Thank you again!
I’m so glad that I could help! 😌 Thank you for your comment! I love hearing about people’s experiences.
Part of the issue is that Jesus did die for our sins, so their is in some way a substitionary atonment, but loving rather than penal. It just isn't penal. God is a wicked pagan god who needs appeasing in this way.
You want to come out of the Catholic church truly Satan's church .
@@biblebill6206 no lol
It's all about Jesus becoming sin for us and bearing our sins.. God can legally forgive us now without being Injust.
To obey is better than sacrifice could not be true if God needed to be placated by a blood offering. He is so much higher than everything! His desire was to have us with Him and He made the way! God set the rules, so the fallen created being (Satan) can only deceive through religious teachings. There's so much more to unpack in all that was accomplished on the cross beside the atonement. Yes, the sacrifice had to happen to fulfill the Law & the prophets, but HE came to literally breathe life back into whomsoever. John 3:16-17. I'm very happy to hear you talk about the immense LOVE that God the Father had/has for us! & that He is not angry at us, but at the evil. He's not the great task-master, but He is just! He has His ways. Paradoxical & impossible to comprehend if one isn't abiding in His Spirit. His ways are foolishness to the wise and the worldly. THANK GOD!!!! He hid them from the wise and revealed them to His precious 'babes'!👍👍
I was in a theology course once, and the reformed teacher was telling about his gripe with redemption through the cross.
I never understood this. It is the greatest sign of His love for us!
Now i understand. He did not see the redemption as i did. Christ bearing all that suffering and death, bearing all the consequence of sin so He can be WITH us in our suffering and help us overcome it.
What my teacher was arguing against was penal substistution...
It is sometimes challenging in an oecumenical setting. It is like speaking different languages
What i want to say, is thank you! I can now see better where my reformed brothers and sisters come from.
I was very miffed at my teacher at the time. I thought it was scandalous to argue against the redemptive aspect of the cross to a group of aspiring catechists.
But i see now what he was aguing against, and i would argue against that too. I would have liked for him to give a better alternative, but i see he meant well
Protestant here - genuinely trying to understand various perspectives, especially those fundamental to salvation. I appreciate you trying to honestly represent the PSA perspective, but I do feel as though you may not fully comprehend that view in order to represent it fairly and thus debate it. Though I'm not a Calvinist, I do believe in the imputed righteousness of Christ, understanding He took our sin upon Himself, and gave us His righteousness. Is it not the catholic belief that God's justice is perfect and there is penalty for sin... that penalty being death? "For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus (Romans 6:23)."
Furthermore, scripture plainly shows that Christ suffered bc of our transgressions: "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 (ISA 53:5)." Also, "For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God 2 Cor 5:21." It is the blood of the sacrifice that covers our sin - we see this in Genesis 3 w/ the first sacrifice, covering the sin of Adam and Eve.
Elsewhere, I believe you misrepresent the Calvinist... and broader Protestant perspective is in your explanation of the Trinity. I know of no reformed persons that would separate the Father from God on the cross. To say that God forsook Christ, the person, is to agree with the 4th Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon where the Church explicitly defined the relationship b/t Jesus' divine nature and His human nature. Jesus was not abused by the Father and forced on the cross to appease an angry God. Scripture tells us that God (all three persons of the Trinity) are offended by sin. Jesus is the eternal Son, and when He died on the cross, He was there because He chose to lay down His life. The Great Judge, the One who will judge all humanity, freely gave up His grace, humbled Himself, and paid the wadge for our sin. It's strange to hear you explain it as if it was a vindictive God against an innocent Jesus - perhaps I am now misrepresenting your perspective and if that is the case, I apologize.
And while there's much to be discussed here, I want to make one final point. This is, in fact, an early Church concept. 'The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus' (2nd-century) says this: "O sweet exchange! O unsearchable operation! O benefits surpassing all expectation! That the wickedness of many should be hid in a single righteous One, and that the righteousness of One should justify many transgressors!" Not wanting to seem too reformed, but Augustine (354-430 AD) is understood by nearly all Christians to be perhaps the greatest theological mind of the 4th and 5th century. In his commentary on Psalm 51 he said, "For even the Lord was subject to death, but not on account of sin: He took upon Him our punishment, and so looseth our guilt... Now, as men were lying under this wrath by reason of their original sin... there was need for a mediator, that is for a reconciler, who by the offering of one sacrifice, of which all the sacrifices of the law and the prophets were types, should take away this wrath... Now when God is said to be angry, we do not attribute to Him such a disturbed feeling as exists in the mind of an angry man; but we call His just displeasure against sin by the name "anger," a word transferred by analogy for human emotions.
Well put, I guess I can understand where Catholics are coming from but I agree that PSA does indeed seem to be thoroughly Biblical and speaks more fully into the love relationship Christ has for us being willing to endure the wrath of God on our behalf. Also not a Calvinist.
There is a difference between the belief that Christ is our Redeemer through His redemptive sacrifice and the belief purported by PSA that the purpose of Christ's sacrifice was to satisfy God's wrath. No-one is disputing that Christ is our Redeemer. Rather, He suffered and died for us as an act of Grace - not as an act of legalism. He showed us that He conquered death so that we can believe and follow Him. He died for US sinners to move US into Him - it is US sinners who needed Him - not an allegedly punitive God incapable of forgiveness, grace and mercy. The purpose of God's discipline is restorative - not merely punitive.
@@lisnafulla Appreciate the clarity. In most instances, it sounds like the two sides are speaking past one another but essentially saying the same thing. I think that oversimplifies the nuances, and maybe dilutes the issues w/ wording, but I can certainly agree with most of what you said and still hold the position that Christ paid the penalty of death - a penalty we all owe. That does not negate the love of God, rather proves the love of God. Without perfect justice, God cannot be love. Also, I'm not sure where the idea that protestants believe that "God is incapable of forgiveness, grace, and mercy." That's a serious misunderstanding or misrepresentation... in this case it appears to be both. I would like to see where such a belief is held in any mainline protestant denomination. I mean read the writings of the puritans alone - which are dripping with God's grace, mercy, and forgiveness - prove our desperate need for a savior. Furthermore, the only one capable of complete salvation is God Himself. He created the law, and He fulfilled the law. In Him there is no more condemnation or death. Conversely, outside of Him, condemnation and death await. Finally, I also agree that God's perfect justice is restorative. But again, that does not negate the fact that there remains a penalty for continued disobedience (punitive action).
@@lisnafulla this explanation you suggest also makes great sense. And I am by no means knowledgeable on this subject although I will be researching more in the future. But I do not immediately understand why both cannot be true at the same time. Of course Christ conquered death and redeems us by His grace. But how does this process work. Ultimately his act of dying on the cross seems unnecessary if it was not to be the sacrificial lamb for our sins. How does his dying forgive us if it's not a satisfying of justice? Although I am totally on board for Christ conquering death and prevailing thus showing love is greater than death, I don't think legalism is apart of this conversation at all. Legalism is the idea that salvation is attained by a system of rules to merit salvation. Christ's sacrifice is not only a victory over sin and death but is most certainly as you say an act of grace where he takes on the wrath of God. Albeit, this is not equivalent to Him going to hell forever because Hell is where sinners go to continue in sin. Christ has no sin in Him.
So I guess my main question to you is "How does Jesus's death redeem us if it isn't satisfying God justice and wrath?" After all it is God who judges people and condemns them. And people do still die and sin so it isn't as if Christ stopped it altogether, He showed that He can save us from death.
@@narrowpath1898 Thanks for your comment. I agree with you that there is much overlap in what both sides believe as regards Jesus' atonement. I do believe that the notion that God the Father had to inflict his wrath on Jesus - as a matter of justice - is incompatible with the belief that Jesus' atonement was an act of Grace, given FREELY to us, planned by the Father and performed by Jesus. Biblical forgiveness means foregoing retributive "justice". The Prodigal Son was not subject to "justice" - hence the complaint by his brother to his father in that Parable. Those who profess themselves as children of the Father and co-sons with Christ, are not under the legalism of the Father's justice in terms of salvation, rather we are under His gift of grace. The workers who came at the last hour were paid the same as the workers who came earier in the day - another parable contradicting man's view of "justice". Christ died for us - in obedience to the Father and in whom the Father was well pleased. This further contradicts the notion that the Father inflicted his wrath onto his Son. The wrath that Jesus suffered was the consequence of sin - death - that Christ suffered despite his innocence based on the unjust judgment of men who rejected Him as our Messiah.
“God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood-to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished- he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus. Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. Because of what law? The law that requires works? No, because of the law that requires faith.”
Romans 3:25-27 NIV
I don’t deny the atonement. I deny penal substitution. 😊
@@EmbracingTradition100 100%
@@EmbracingTradition100hi thank for the video but I am a little bit confused on what would be the point of Christ death if it is not to atone for sins I would really appreciate it if you would clarify this for me because it’s very interesting, but I don’t fully understand the concept that you have presented on the point of what Christ death was for
@@bullofthewoods9491 I believe that Christ atoned for our sins but I believe the atonement is not about Christ being punished by His Father. Christ gave His life as an acceptable sacrifice to destroy death, sin and the devil in His person and by doing so enables us to be born again, and to walk in His ways ending in the ultimate purification of our souls.
massive problems with your translation, a fact demonstrating the arbitrariness of protestant interpretations of Scripture - 'atonement' is not in the Greek text, rather, hilasterion, meaning, instrument of expiation, which means purification - 'unpunished' is not in the text altogether - it's an invention, in order to confirm the idea of penal substitution - 'have faith in Jesus' is not in the text - instead, it says, 'those who belong to Christ's faithfulness'
At this point, it’s not even about convincing Prots, it’s about bringing souls to Heaven. Halfway thru the book “On the Fewness of the Saved”…once saved, always saved is a conveyor belt to eternal damnation.
Thumbnails alone will skyrocket the numbers, love the style. God bless you sister!
Amen!
Thank you so much! I appreciate the positive feedback! 😀
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans.
This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth.
I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
“And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
30 I and my Father are one.”
John 10:28-30
The idea that it is the remnant that will be saved is concerning. “No one can take them out of my hand” does seem to support eternal security. I guess you could make a case that he lets people go of his own Will; but the verse doesn’t address that.
I really love your thumbnails. Great information too.
Thank you so much! I try to have fun with them! ❤️😊
@@EmbracingTradition100 you do a good job.
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans.
This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth.
I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
@@halleylujah247I see your comments everywhere, you were even a mod in the sam shamoun debate i believe
Thanks for explaining your point of view. I am starting to think more about exactly what Jesus accomplished on the cross and I want to hear the various perspectives. Given your framework, how would you interpret these verses from Isaiah? Isaiah 53:3, 53:10
Thanks, John Beggs
You said in 18:20 "You can't propitiate a being who is already willing to forgive."
If we follow that argument then the question arises:
Can God forgive even without Christ His Son dying on the cross?
A ton of passages suggest that God forgives sin before the cross.
Also to make someone propitious does not always mean they were angry. If you go and buy someone flowers or make them dinner can make them propitious i.e. happy. There are plenty of sacrifices that do not have anything to do with sin or wrong doing.
@@domega7392 Passages also suggest that God forgives BASED on the future work of the Cross.
Lutheran here, I’ve also had some reservations with Penal Substitutionary Atonement and Anselmian Satisfaction (the latter of which my tradition has largely followed along with). This is a really great video and you really covered most of the feelings I have towards these false (I would even say heretical) ideas. Though I would like to add another issue you did not mention in this video, that being that most people neglect the Holy Spirit in their ideas of satisfaction and atonement. Is not the same Holy Spirit which resided in Christ, now in His bride, the Church? It is that same Holy Spirit which by faith allows people to become members of the Church and receive God’s love and grace, whether that is just general or in the Sacraments (Baptism, Eucharist, Confession & Absolution). I would consider it more intellectually honest to be a binitarian than to fully accept Anselmian Satisfaction and Penal Substitution (both are terrible, I’m just saying that one is at least more intellectually honest in the flow of thought).
Again great video, just something else I thought was missing.
Thank you for pointing that out. I haven’t thought of that critique and it’s a valid one as well! 🙂
The Holy Spirit is treated as inter-relational and distinct from the Father and Son, with a specific role and hierarchy.
Incredible video 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻 I have struggled with this topic and this really made the puzzle pieces fall into place for me. Thank you!
Thank you for sharing! 😊
A sinner can become a believer By Faith in Jesus Christ and believing in what he has done on the cross to redeem us from Sin and so that they can be forgiven of their Sins by accepting him into our lives and making him Lord and Savior now once a person becomes saved they must work with the Lord to stay in right standing with him by abiding in the Word and living a lifestyle of prayer and fasting and always exercising Love towards God and one another and turning away from wickedness through repentance and we must do that which is Good and righteous in the sight of God and If we choose to meet the requirements that are essential to staying within Christ then there is nothing that can separate us from Gods love unless we choose to walk away from Christ and not meet the requirements to stay in right standing with him Philippians2:10-12 Roman’s 8:38-39 however our works alone doesn’t save us it is upon us choosing wether or ky we are gonna have having faith in Jesus Christ. so our works doesn’t outweigh Gods grace sister
R.C. Sproul knows the truth now. All of his millions cannot help him. May the Lord have mercy.
The opening statement of the second segment sums it all up nicely!
You are right. PSA disolves God's grace, since Xaris in Greek means chiefly "cheerfulness". PSA erases God's grace by demanding his wrath be put onto someone still - in the case of PSA onto Jesus. That is not Grace.
Based
This is interesting and the point about forgiving as God does helped me reflect. What surprised me though was when you said God doesn’t have emotions. How does God the Father weep and laugh and be a “jealous” God in that case? How does God the son/Christ also weep and “look around at them in anger, and deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts…”. For Christ’s case someone might say (I’m not saying you would say this) that it’s because of his human nature, but to assign it only to his human nature reminds me of St. Cyril’s 4th anathema, “If anyone distributes between the two persons or hypostases the expressions used either in the gospel or in the apostolic writings, whether they are used by the holy writers of Christ or by Him about Himself and ascribes some to him as a man, thought of separately from the Word from God, and others as befitting God, to him as to the Word from God the Father, let him be anathema.” I’m obviously not trying to say you’re anathema, I don’t know nearly enough to say that about anyone, it just reminded me of it and I was wondering what you mean. It’s also unnerving to imagine a God who weeps but in reality feels nothing. I know that just because something is comforting doesn’t mean it’s true, but I have found comfort in reading that Jesus seems to have emotions as He weeps for Lazarus (even when He knows He will raise him) and shows anguish in the Garden of Gethsemane. It’s a solace knowing that even the perfect lamb of God didn’t experience the world indifferently, but had internal states of mind that were responses to external events - which I would define as the essence of emotions.
I am referring to the doctrine of impassability. God doesn’t have emotions like we have emotions, but certainly Christ human nature did allow him to have human emotions as well as experience all that comes with being a human being such as death and sickness. I can’t articulate fully in a comment here but I would just encourage you to look into the doctrine of impassability.
Not only was God’s death necessary in Jesus but only perfect love can restore a relationship with perfect love hence opening up the gates of Heaven. The joy of the Cross Paul mentions is exactly this how the wages of sin have been paid so that we may have life and not all go automatically to the eternal separation of Hell according to God’s Justice.
When we read in Genesis 2:17 that God told Adam, regarding the tree of the knowledge of good and evil “in the day that you eat of it, you will surely die,” we see that there is a death sentence pronounced as the punishment for sin, but when Adam did sin, we don’t see an execution, which is what we should expect, instead, we see a redemption. After they ate of the tree, instead of killing them right then and there that day, which is what they rightly deserved, in Genesis 3:21, we see that God makes a “propitiation” on their behalf, that is, that God Himself makes an offering to satisfy the justice of God against sin. God took an animal that had known no sin and He killed it before their eyes instead of them, and out of that innocent animal, He made skins of clothing and placed them over Adam and Eve. So we see that not only was a sinless substitute killed on behalf of guilty sinners condemned to die, but because they were covered in the skins of the sinless substitute, from now on whenever God sees these sinners, He sees the innocent animal who died on their behalf, and who now covers them. Obviously, the death of the innocent animal did not take away their sins, but by being covered with the innocent animal who died on their behalf, it appeased the justice of God until the time when an ultimate sacrifice would be made that would not just cover sins, but would actually remove them - this is commonly referred to as “Penal Substitutionary Atonement.”
Through the sacrifice of an animal, God taught Israel that the wages of sin is death (Genesis 2:17), but that through the shedding of blood, through an innocent dying in the place of another, there is a way of escaping the wrath of God, and through that act, we also have a way that we may approach God (Romans 6:23, cf. Matthew 27:51). Israel knew well that the sacrifice of an animal was never enough to remove the sins from an individual, and we see this in Psalm 40:6, because if that were true, then there would be no need to continuously sacrifice animals day after day, but that through the sacrifice of an animal, Israel saw an object lesson that looked forward to the promise of the one sacrifice that was to come that would not just cover sins, but would remove them, truly justifying us before God.
In the Old Testament sacrificial system, the individual Israelite was instructed to bring an animal sacrifice whenever he approached God; the family was to kill and consume an animal at the yearly observance of the Passover; the nation was to be represented by the high priest annually on the Day of Atonement when the blood of the offering was sprinkled on the mercy seat of the Ark of the Covenant within the Holy of Holies of the Jewish temple, and at the opening of the New Testament, John the Baptist recognized Jesus as “The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29)!
So, the progression was like this:
One sacrifice for one individual
One sacrifice for one family
One sacrifice for one nation
One sacrifice for the world (John 1:29, cf. John 3:16)
It is a very Biblical concept that has nothing to do with reformed theology as we find teachings referencing it all over scripture.
1. If I pronounce the consequences of an action does that mean that I am the executor? It literally says if you do this, you will die, (dying you will die). Not I will execute punishment.
2. Yes, Adam did transgress a commandment, but Paul seems to think that the idea of sin already existed and it was through sin that death came into the world. Actually Jewish traditions says, through the envy of the devil, death entered the world since man participated through his deception.
3. Why would God make himself propitious by killing an animal? That literally makes no sense given that scripture dose not even say that (maybe it hints at the death of an animal). It just say that he made them garments of skin. Then expels them so that they would not remain in a state of death forever.
4. " from now on whenever God sees these sinners, He sees the innocent animal who died on their behalf" Where does it say that in any Jewish writings or tradition? Completely made up.
5. Through the sacrifice of an animal in the Torah, show me where any sin was placed on the animal and died by the wrath of God in place of the offered? Except on the day of atonement where the sins of the people were place on the scapegoat.
6. Finally, the justice of God dose not require the death of the innocent in order to be appeased or "made propitious". A matter of fact scripture says the complete opposite, that God dose not even delight in the death of the sinner, he most certainly does not delight in the death of the innocent, even Moses tried to take the place of Israel and God rejected it, EVEN God would not take accept the death of Issac. Punishing the innocent on our behalf dose not make GOD happy, maybe the pagan god Zeus.
Sacrifice is absolutely a biblical concept throughout all of scripture but by means of reconciliation and purification and did not always require the death of something or someone.
And one more thing. The video seems to be talking about atonement and not necessarily the Passover about Christ being the Lamb of God. Which was a separate feast Day from the day of atonement. Which had nothing to do with propitiation but rather manumission.
@@domega7392
Since this is not exactly the best format for an in-depth discussion, I humbly recommend these books for a Biblical understanding of the Atonement.
"To Save Sinners," by Michael Riccardi
"Redemption Accomplished and Applied," by John Murray (probably the better in this list)
"Definite Atonement," by Gary D. Long
"Original Sin: The Doctrine of Imputation, Vital to the Christian Faith," by Gary Long
"The Imputation of Adam's Sin," by John Murray
"The Doctrine of God," by John Frame, though not the main topic of the book, he does of course go into the atonement
Don't you think Adam's forbidden fruit represented the law?
@raykidder906
It might be a foreshadow of the law, but without researching it, I'm afraid to say anything about it with any certainty.
Excellent job! What I'd like to see -- a discussion between you and a reformed theologian/ well-versed person on this topic. I think your arguments are excellent, but would like to hear the other side in defense.
Over-all I sense in you both intellectual rigor, and a good heart!
Thank you for your kind comment! 😊
Penal substitutionary Atonement, a novelty?
As it is written in Isaiah, 700 years before the Lord Jesus Christ's death, burial and Resurrection:
Isaiah 53:5 But he (the Lord Jesus Christ) 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.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
we have turned-every one-to his own way;
and the LORD has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.
...v.10
Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him (Jesus);
he has put him to grief;
when his soul makes an offering for guilt,...
V.12b because he (Jesus) poured out his soul to death
and was numbered with the transgressors;
yet he bore the sin of many,
and makes intercession for the transgressors.
Once again, god gave that to Isaiah 700 years before the Lord Jesus's crucifixion. It is blatantly obvious what that passage is teaching and you have to lie to yourself to believe anything else.
Let's see how the Apostle Paul articulates the most important aspects of the Gospel: 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, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,"
What scriptures is Paul talking about? It's Isaiah. The clearest description of what the death of the Messiah was actually accomplishing and what was going on in the unseen realm.
So for 1500 years Christian’s didn’t get the memo? No one believed PSA until John Calvin
@EmbracingTradition100 well I see you can't argue with the scriptures. Are you omniscient? Can you really tell me that absolutely zero people believed what Isaiah and Paul said for 1500 years? Not on your life. God always has a Remnant who is faithful to the written word of God instead of the vain traditions of men.
As for the early church not getting the memo, here's the Apostle Peter's first epistle we're in he quotes Isaiah 53 concerning the sufferings of Christ. 1 Peter 2: 21 For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps. 22 He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth. 23 When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly. 24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed
Please read the chapter side by side. You'll see that the language used in Peter's second chapter is identical with that of Isaiah 53. As regards the early church, here is a good article in which early church father's outside of the earliest Believers and apostolic community teach substitutionary Atonement. www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/penal-substitution-early-church/
@@treasurevessel It was good that you cited 1 Peter 2:21. But this does not prove or even suggest PSA - the notion that God inflicted wrath on His innocent Son as a pre-condition for forgiveness. Biblical forgiveness foregoes forensic justice in favor of love. The Prodigal Son was forgiven without any penalty. The servant who owed his master a debt was forgiven his debt, but was later condemned only after he sought forensic justice (debt repayment) from another servant. Over and over again God teaches us about his love and mercy for his children. The Levitical Law wasn't meant to be punitive; it's purpose was to teach and instruct. PSA proponents fail to understand this.
@@treasurevesselIsiaiah 53:10 must be read and understood in context. Isaiah 53:5 ESV: "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." This speaks to the purpose of Jesus' suffering as being for healing and redemption - not punitive.
Isaiah 53:8 ESV: "By oppression and judgment he was taken away; and as for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people?" This verse states that Christ was oppressed and judged by MAN (his generation). Christ's unjust judgment came from man, not God.
Isaiah 53:10 ESV: "Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him; he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand." Based on the Greek and Hebrew texts, an accurate interpretation of this passage is that it was part of God's salvific plan that Christ's human body be crushed. The Hebrew word daka means "allow to be bruised" or "allow to be crushed," implying permission and not the direct infliction of suffering by God himself.
The phrase "his soul makes an offering for guilt" (asham in Hebrew) draws from Levitical sacrifices, whose purpose was reparation and restoration and not punitive substitution. Levitical sacrifices were understood to bring reconciliation, symbolizing purification and forgiveness - and not God's pouring out of wrath onto the sacrifice itself.
Pay attention to the words "he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the Lord shall prosper". This speaks to the purpose of Christ's submission to unjust suffering, which is to bring a victorious outcome that conquers death and reconciles the faithful to God's will. Thus, the bible expresses the purpose of Christ's suffering as healing, restorative and redemptive - and not as punitive or to bear wrath inflicted by God.
Isaiah 53:11 also emphasizes God’s PLEASURE in the Servant’s suffering, which fits with the purpose of redemption and restoration - not with a purpose of punitive retribution. Moreover, elsewhere in Scripture, God's forgiveness is portrayed as unconditional and merciful (e.g., Psalm 103:10-12, Hosea 6:6), without requiring a penal substitute.
Isaiah 53 highlights the purpose of the Servant's suffering as being redemptive and not penal. The language of offering, offspring, and prosperity speaks to a restorative purpose rather than a substitutionary punishment.
I appreciate your heart in sharing your understanding with people, knowing that you are exposing yourself to criticism and rebuke. Coming from a non-reformed protestatnt perspective, what I hear is a conflation between justification and sanctification. I think most protestants would agree that the church and our participation (works) are a necessary part of growing in Christ (Sanctifiaction) We reject, however, that this participation is necessary for salvation. Many scriptures describe salvation (justification) as a once and done event in our lives where we are raised to new life, adopted into God's family, guaranteed an inheritance, sealed in the Spirit, etc. Paul, in 1 Cor, describes a lot of things that the believers in Coritnth are doing wrong, be he still addresses them as believers. In Ch. 3 he talks about the idea of works being tested in the fire. Works made of straw will be burned up, the workers will suffer loss, but they are still saved. This seems to support the idea that works are not necessary for salvation, but play a key role in our sanctifiaction, blessing/concequesnce in this world, and varying rewards after judgement.
Thank you for bringing up some challenges to PSA that I have not considered. I will explore these more. I pray that God will guide all of us to a fuller understanding of the truth and grant us wisdom and grace when we are engaging with others who we disagree with. Amen. Thank you for your work in this video.
This was excellent! I just subscribed 😁
Thank you so much! 😊
I completely agree, God stepped into time, taking on our Sin, while we where yet sinners Christ died for us! stepping in between our Sin, making The Way of Redemption.
Trinitarian doctrine divides Gods personality, This distortion of Who God IS, leads to a confusing understanding of Christ work on His cross.
The Truth Of A Loving God that became intimately evolved with His creation is The Greatest Story Ever told indeed. The understanding of a Love so Amazing. God, the Creator of heaven & earth, Chose, to become intimately involved in the very substance in His own creation, coming close, taking upon Himself the form of a servant, humbling to death on the cross, bringing revelation of the Great I AM, the Holy One true God expressed to His creation in human flesh. Healing the sick, raising the dead, feeding the thousands, speaking Truth to the darkness, Word of Life & correction to dead religion. Offering his own begotten body, willingly laying down his human flesh, pouring out precious, PRICELESS blood, so redeeming His creation unto Himself. As He did not leave his body in the grave He Rose again by the power of His eternal Spirit, assessing after 40 days with his disciples, opening their understanding & giving them commandment. They obeyed, returning to Jerusalem & He Poured out His Holy Ghost upon them, indwelling the believers, establishing His New Covenant and a New Creature, His body on earth.
All the fullness dwelleth in HIM, there is no other name under heaven, given amount men whereby we must be saved. The Promise is fulfilled in The New Testament Christian Church.
Hear Oh Is real, the Lord our God, the Lord is One.
Amen. Assuming if Penal Substitutionary Atonement is right, then there was actually no need for the New Testaments to be written and put together in the bible. Just one page will do.
Man, what a great video!
You should do a follow up video on the Satisfaction theory of atonement.
Great suggestion! 😊
As a Catholic hearing this for the first time, you explained it well enough to help me immediately understand that penal substitution theology is complete nonsense.
It's worse than that, it makes God out to be a monster.
All theology is nonsense.
@ So what nonsense do you believe about the origins of the universe? Science definitively states that something most definitely cannot be created from nothing. So what outside of time, space, matter and energy caused time, space, matter and energy to come into existence at the moment of the Big Bang thereby creating the massive universe?
@@Knight-of-the-Immaculata Tee hee! The usual drivel.
To start with, I don’t believe anything about the origins of the universe. I suspect that it has existed eternally in one form or another, but I don’t know, and I don’t pretend to know.
“Science” doesn’t state that something cannot come from nothing. (The conservation principle is an axiom. It is a necessary assumption.) We have no experience of “nothing”, and we don’t even know whether “nothing” is even possible. But if it is true that something cannot be created from nothing, then you can’t claim that God created the universe.
What does “outside of time and space” mean? If anything?
We do not know that the universe came into existence at the moment of the Big Bang. If the BB actually happened, it might just have been the beginning of this phase of the universe.
If you really have to tell yourself a story about the origin of the universe, why not accept the Daoist version? It makes more sense than the tale of a super ghost saying كُن فَيَكُونُ.
Very interestig content. Great biblical examples.
Thank you! 😊
Think about this as well, "I did not desire sacrifice but mercy." You do not need to propiate for sin to show mercy for it. You only need absorb it.
You did a great job pointing out the theological problems with trying to appease God through propitiatory sacrifices like some kind of pagan, but...
"If anyone saith that the sacrifice of the Mass ... is not a propiatory sacrifice ... let him be anathema." (Council of Trent, Session 22, Canon III)
Catholics mean something very different with the word propitiation than Calvinists and evangelicals. At least to my understanding. Shameless Popery deals with the topic much better than I can if you go watch him on this subject. 😌
She was talking about PSA appeasing God's anger by punishing Christ in place of men. The Catholic view is more propitiating God by offering Him something greater than what man's sins have taken away, and that is the love and obedience of Christ offered to the Father on our behalf. Jesus submitting to his passion and death is an act of love which makes satisfaction for our sins.
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans.
This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth.
I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
Excellent video.
The underlying problem with Protestant (especially reformed but see also Luther's snow-covered dungheap) soteriology is that it misunderstands the Law as forensic rather than didactic. Of course, secular law is both - it proscribes certain acts and it sets forth punishments for committing said acts. However, there is also an underlying message - this act is wrong. We see this in the requirement (at least the requirement in Western legal systems) for the sentence to be proportional to the offense; speeding gets punished with a fine but murder with death because murder is significantly more evil than speeding and the different prescribed penalties for different crimes evidence the didactic nature of the law.
The forensic part of the law exists because the world is fallen. Law, as a governing system, exists because people are estranged from God so that even if a man is unwilling to conduct himself according to its teachings, he can nevertheless be forced to conduct himself according to its power. There was no need for such law in Eden - paradise was ante-nomian (I know, it is a Latin-Greek portmanteau, but I couldn't help myself with the pun). God, therefore, has no need for the Law. To view the work of salvation in a forensic paradigm, therefore, is to deny that the Paschal mystery actually did anything. With forensic soteriology the Law was not fulfilled, it was simply applied; then God is playing mind games with Himself by applying "merits" earned here to persons over there - as though He were the court administrator allocating collected court fees to various departments though some budgetary process.
Perfectly put! Thank you! 😊
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans.
This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth.
I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
I used to be Calvinist. I left PCA back in 2020 due to Revoice controversy. God led me back to history of the Catholic Church and Church teachings of Scriptures and Sacred Tradition. Getting rid of Calvinist glasses is difficult yet I did. PSA along with TULIP ideas of Calvin are Gnostic in nature. I honestly turn off by Calivinist pride and arrogance. I once ask my Calvinist friend which church in Protestantism is true church, he said local church is true church. I found that to be unsatisfactory in light of Bible and history.
I already start on my journey to Catholic Church hopefully I get one one rcia that teach about Catholicism not about James Martin views or director disagreeing with some of Church dogmas. My previous rcia director said he was surprised that his liberalism don’t scare me away.
I’m glad to hear that you are on your way into the church and out of Calvinism. Thank you for sharing your experience. 😊
Excellent. Gained a new sub.
Awesome, thank you!😊
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans.
This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth.
I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
This argument makes sense if one ignores the entire Old Testament and early Christians' use of Old Testament scripture to explain the salvific work of Jesus the Messiah. (Yes, there were other ways that the scripture writers describe the divine mystery of this salvation as well: new birth in Christ, adoption, marriage, court of justice, etc.) The church fathers, such as St. Anselm, wrote extensively on God taking atonement into his own hands on behalf of humanity.
Even today, the atonement is written into the Eucharistic liturgies.
But of course, such concepts as sin and the need for reconciliation with God offend the modern mind.
I don’t deny atonement. I don’t know how you’re coming away with that.
Thank you for making this video and sharing it. You did a great job of explaining both, the issues and the distortion.
Thank you for your encouraging comment! 🙂
It's not about ANGER. It's about JUSTICE! And Isaiah 53 says HE did it on JESUS.
No. God can’t display justice by committing what he has told us is injustice.
@EmbracingTradition100 Please reconsider........ Jesus chose to take our sins in the Greatest Love Story Ever.
@@EmbracingTradition100 God commands us to do things he himself does not do. We cannot for example command all things to worship us as God does.
The reason for this is God has a unique place of authority and worth-and when we bring down God to our level and make him equal to us, we make an idol.
@@Only-c6f I don’t deny that Jesus took my sins I deny that Jesus was the object of God’s wrath. That’s a huge distinction.
@@Dizerner except your analogy fails. God cannot sin. PSA makes God immoral. That goes against his nature and His character.
ALL other theories of atonement, and I do mean ALL, can only have meaning if derived from the ideas of sin and its punishment. WHY are we even in this mess? Why does God have to FIX anything at all? What is it God is even fixing? Without a thorough understanding of what sin and its punishment entails. you are lost in the water, you are floundering. The ONLY reason that makes any sense for God to become a man and die, to save the world, forgive sins, defeat death, defeat the devil, be a good influence, establish his government, and ransom everyone back, is this:
The punishment of sin creates all the problems, and sin must be fully judged for God to redeem.
Jesus judges sin on the Cross, and "payment" language permeates all of Scripture.
*God became a man and died for one reason: to suffer the punishment sin deserves.*
Here's the deal:
God can defeat the devil and death without becoming a man and dying; why does he need to do it that way?
*Makes no sense.*
God can influence people and display his government without becoming a man and dying; why does he need to do it that way?
*Makes no sense.*
God can ransom people back and prove himself innocent, without becoming a man and dying; why does he need to do it that way?
*Makes no sense.*
Ever heard the saying, "There's no such thing as a free lunch?"
Or how about, "A shortcut seldom is?"
We know, even if the lunch comes to us free, someone, somewhere paid for it.
And it is interesting just how much Scripture uses "payment" language in both the OT and the NT, this is very significant.
But what is essentially being said by denying PSA is:
*Jesus can pay for us, without really paying.*
That's the argument, logically, from the anti-PSA crowd.
It's not about God being angry, we already know there are instances of this.
It's not about God punishing God, or breaking up the Trinity, or suffering an eternity of wrath, we know all things are possible for God, it's a relational not ontological break, an infinite being can suffer in finite time what a finite being can suffer infinitely, God can experience himself negatively, none of those are real problems.
It's about *the holiness of God demanding punishment for sin.* And yet if all we emphasize is "God is all love" language, we deny a very vital, essential, and integral part of God, his justice. God is not *just* love. Else there would be no punishment, no judgment, no hell, no wrath anywhere at all, no diseases, viruses, pain, suffering, torture, abuse, neglect, unfairness, loneliness, sadness, unhappiness, violence, evil.
God is not just love.
If God were JUST love-think of it-God would allow anybody to do anything.
God would not have enemies, if he were JUST love.
God would send Satan flowers every morning and make him a fresh cup of coffee, if God were JUST love.
God would never rebuke or warn or threaten anyone, if God were JUST love.
There would be nothing painful or confusing or offensive or hard, if God were JUST love.
_If God were JUST love, there would be no need to punish sin.... ever._
Now there are those who try to change the word punishment with a watered down version they just call "consequences." But this is just a semantic game removing the moral guilt element inherent in committing an evil action. If I trip walking down some stairs, that's a consequence of my actions, but there is no morally wrong aspect to what I did, there is no guilt. If we just redefine "if you do something evil and have something bad happen to you as a result of what you deserve" with the term "consequence," all we did was put a new word to the same meaning as "punishment." What is being attempted here, is removing moral guilt from sinful actions, and a removal of God's rightful acting role as Judge and dispenser of justice, as if "karma" takes over the job from God.
So what we see here, is that people who deny PSA, are denying an essential attribute of God:
*God's hatred for sin, God's necessary judgment on sin.*
So they "rewrite" the Cross to be about anything BUT judging sin.
_The Cross is about God being willing to show he will suffer._
*But not judgment on sin.*
_The Cross is about God being a super nice fella' who is willing to get beat up and killed._
*But not judgment on sin.*
_The Cross is about God showing he's in charge and governs the world._
*But not judgment on sin.*
_The Cross is about God beating up the devil and giving him a big black eye._
*But not judgment on sin.*
_The Cross is about God defeating death and giving creation a brand new chance._
*But not judgment on sin!*
_The Cross is about Jesus being a great example to us, and inspiring us to die like him._
*But not judgment... on our sins.*
See how that tricky "swapparoo" happens in this shell game, where we sneak out one of God's essential attributes? Anti-PSA advocates, like those who deny the Trinity, like to claim there is no verse to support God has to judge sin with wrath on his Son. But, like the Trinity, there are clear and obvious deductions we cannot escape from, and God expects us to make deductions in the Bible.
There is no verse that says *God skips over justice.* There is no verse that says *God will leave sin unpunished.* And yet they try to take verses that express God's forgiveness won through the Cross and through Jesus' suffering, and neuter and rip out the actual sacrificial element of Christ that is made to suffer for the sins of the world, as if God can just skip over his own holiness!
_Anti-PSA is a spirital "free lunch."_
The Law doesn't bring wrath under this scenario, because Jesus never really has to pay for our sins. But the whole reason Jesus said he came, the cup of redemption in his blood for the forgiveness, the basis of the ransom, was the true actual substitution in our place. "The Law brings wrath," but it's not true, if we all sinned against the Law, yet there was no wrath against our sins, it all just magically disappears without honoring God's holiness.
That's striking at the very CORE of the Gospel, the DEEPEST and MOST CENTRAL reason Christ came to die, to die in our place, to suffer what we should have gotten.
Not less-God's integrity uses equal weights and measures.
There's a great advertisement for sugar I once saw, it is short and gets your attention:
*"Sugar. There is no substitute."*
Now we all know they are always trying to find a substitute for sugar, because everyone has a sweet tooth. But there is a substance and authenticity that an artificial substitute just never has to the original. What we are being offered here, is a spiritual "artificial substitute" for the punishment of our sins. Jesus does not have to really fulfill the Law's punishment, he doesn't really have to pay, he just has to physically die the first death, and never the second.
All other theories of the atonement derive from Jesus paying the penalty for sin.
Jesus paying a ransom, Jesus conquering death, Jesus conquering the devil, Jesus being a a good moral influence, Jesus conquering sin, Jesus redeeming the suffering and imperfections of creation.
All these bad things that need redeeming all came from the creation's rebellion, all these things came from the original sins, all these things are curses and judgments that came as a consequence of what each of our sin deserves-
There is no "problem" Jesus "solves" that is not in some way connected to "sin"!! The atonement of Jesus Christ is not just a good example, a legal loophole, fighting the bad guys, or doing a good deed for humanity. The atonement of Jesus Christ and all the good things that come from it are based in one thing, the Law bringing wrath.
Jesus is judged with the consequences of what sinning against a holy God deserves on our behalf.
Christ suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, to bring us to God. He made him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. The Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all, it pleased the Lord to bruise him, his soul became a guilt offering.
He takes the bullet, he takes the fall, he takes the exact punishment we deserve.
*That's the Gospel.*
One question…if true justice is about paying the penalty how do you forgive as God forgives? If God requires retribution to fulfill his said justice… how does that play out for us, who are to be like God? I don’t forgive my children by exacting punishment from somewhere for their sins. It doesn’t work biblically and it doesn’t work in reality. PSA advocates claim retribution is THE GOSPEL. It’s actually ANTI GOSPEL. It’s antithetical to all that the Gospel entails and all that it requires from us in the way we imitate God.
Great video. In Genesis 8, verse 21, after the great flood god says "never again will I strike down every living being as I have done." Book of Jonah, god is "slow to anger abounding in kindness, repenting of anger.
Another great video Candice with very thoughtful arguments. I agree with your overall conclusions on PSA. Perhaps a good topic to clarify is God’s immutability, as this can be defined in different ways.
For example, does immutability really mean that God can't change his mind? I would argue no - as God is patient with us in coming to repentance. God's immutability is not incompatible with Christ, through his redemptive sacrifice, being the "one mediator" for mankind. Equally, Christ being the "one mediator" does not equate to PSA. We have numerous examples of intercession in the Bible where God responds with love/mercy; Abraham on behalf of Sodom; Moses on behalf of Israel, Samuel on behalf of Israel, Mary asking Jesus for wine at the wedding on Cana, and more. Perhaps, these are prototypes for Christ's intercessionary sacrifice. Intercession is an act of love and mercy. For me, Jesus' sacrifice on the cross was a loving intercessory act given under the Father's merciful plan and provision to turn us to Him. I think this is the Gospel message - not PSA.
Perhaps, I'm nit-picking on your immutability argument a little. 😃 But, overall great job in addressing the challenges inherent in the legalism of PSA.
Thank you for such a thoughtful comment! I think you’re right! I have a difficulty getting everything as clear as I’d like but I really love what you said and I agree with you.
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans.
This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth.
I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
@@Yjohanna You are conflating different issues. Jesus' suffering and conquering death for our redemption does not equate to PSA. The notion that God had to extract a pound of flesh from Christ in retribution for our sins, aka PSA, contradicts the gospel message that God saved us through grace and that grace is a free gift to us from God. PSA contends that a legal price was paid and that redemption is transactional - and thus PSA opposes the message of God's grace given to us as a free gift. Also - PSA is a man-made tradition from the reformation that misinterprets the Bible. It was not taught by the apostles, early church fathers or any branches of the church prior to the reformation. You are correct that Jesus died so that all can be saved, but this is not PSA. The suffering and death that Jesus suffered was inflicted by man - the Jews who rejected Him - and not by the Father.
@@lisnafulla your wrong, God knows everything and He allowed it fully knowing, Jesus also willingly did the sacrifice for all of our sins. If you are not acknowledging that fact you are purely deceive, for God knows everything including the pain and suffering Jesus needs to suffer, but for Jesus loves us so much that He did not want us all to be in hell, He willingly became the lamb for all of us and His blood paid the price for our sins. This is stated in the Holy Scripture and it is the infallible truth.
@@lisnafulla I did not actually watch the vid earlier and commented abruptly. I admit I was mistaken im sorry. I agree with your statement regarding PSA.
Catholic here. I am curious to know if the speaker has done any research on this topic from traditional Catholic and Eastern Orthodox sources. I’ve lectured at length through the Latin and Greek Fathers of the Church and they do not reduce atonement to what the speaker here says. This is a caricature and a lack of being rooted in the sources. What I am hearing here is a reductionism of the full Christian teaching.
Thanks for commenting Erik! I have appreciated your videos and thoughts.
I have not attempted to answer against PSA from all angles but only from the perspective of what I have been taught my entire life in Protestant and Reformed circles. This is more of a critique of the pop level PSA as is articulated by predominant preachers such as John MacArthur and RC Sproul.
I am sure that there are other articulations that are more careful and historic in their understanding.
"Penal Substitution Atonement is Trinitarian Schizophenia" - Scott Hahn
Thank you for this video❤
😊
@@EmbracingTradition100I’ve grown up Protestant but am trying learn more.
@ thank you for sharing! I pray that God continues to guide you as you seek!
@ thank you. I’ve been looking into views on atonement for awhile now. I do not see them as mutually exclusive. Instead I think many have great points and complement one another. If I had to pick, I appreciate Christus Victor the most. I can get behind random too, but I think some take it too far saying a random was paid directly to Satan.
Pretty dang good framing of STA. However, I would love to see the Catholic view of sacrifice ironed out. That’s a topic that I don’t believe apostolic Christians address enough.
I would like to see it ironed out as well. Joe Heschmeyer does the best job that I’ve found so far. His channel is shamelesspopery you should check him out.
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans.
This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth.
I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
Thank you for posting this, very helpful from someone who does not come from this background and having always been confused as to why does anyone need to be punished, why can God not just forgive a person. I am not discounting the consequences of my actions, but I do not believe "God" is or "has" to punish me for every single so called sin. I asked these people if that is true, just definitionally that does not sound like mercy AT ALL, I get a word salad of scriptures and long explanations.
Thank you for your comment!
Most Christians agree that Christ's redemptive sacrifice on the cross made salvation available for all men. Thus, redemption was and is universal. However, salvation itself is conditioned on our faith - and therefore is not universal.
A problem with PSA - the notion that Jesus paid the legal penalty for EVERYONE - is that not everyone is saved. PSA doctrine implies that God accepts Christ's penal substitution for some - but not for others. Since not everyone is saved by PSA, the logical extension of PSA is that God reneges on Christ's penal substitutionary atonement for some sinners. If PSA were true, then all would be saved.
PSA, therefore, upsurps the teaching that we are saved by grace through faith. If we were saved by PSA, then faith by free will would be unnecessary. Calvinists overcome this dilemna with the notion of the Elect, that those who are saved and those whom are damned has been predetermined by God. Put another way, the Reformed notion of determinism is a theological error that is rooted in the error of PSA.
Yes! Thank you for this comment!
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans.
This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth.
I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
@@Yjohannatradition cam be twisted? Tradition is something that remains and I'm as Eastern Orthodox hold to apostles tradition and their successors. Inflatable understanding of Bible by your own is a dangerous myth. It's exactly there you can twist understanding, not holding to ancient tradition of understanding on what we have consensus patrum.
@hakooplayplay3212 how can reading the Bible be dangerous? Do you even know the existence of the Holy Spirit? The Holy Spirit will guide you if you seek Him Jesus in your readings. Traditions on the other hand can be twisted because they are pass on by people. May I ask How do you enter Heaven??
@@Yjohanna Even the devil quoted from Scripture. You need to stop accusing people of being evil and recognize that YOU don't have an infallible understanding of Scripture. Labeling those who disagree with you as evil is unpersuasive and certainly doesn't reflect the fruit of the Spirit. Your comments seem to be based on your tradition, which is a fallible non-apostilic tradition. Unless you are claiming to be a prophet, your personal interpretation of Scripture is not infallible. Please don't condescend others telling them to read their Bible - as if they haven't or don't. If Sola Scriptura were true, we wouldn't have the thousands of different denominations and disunity within Protestantism - all claiming prophetic interpretation from the Holy Spirit despite their disagreements on fundamental doctrines (e.g. Trinity, Baptism, Determinism, Real Presence, KJVonly, etc. etc.)
Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to protect the apostilic tradition, so maybe think twice before attacking what the Bible declared as the "pillar and foundation of truth" with superficial platitudes.
14:23
It’s not that “in order for God to love us He needs some form of payment” but it’s that BECAUSE God loves us He provides this form of payment. Redeem means a purchase. I think you are getting some things like this confused.
However, I do find myself agreeing with some of your points made… which perhaps present flaws in the reformed thought.
Jesus did become a curse for us. He did become sin for us. He did bare our sins in his body.
He was forsaken. “My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me?” He didn’t cry out in agony in response to the devil… but forsaken by God (IN OUR PLACE!)
Isaiah 53:10 KJVS
Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
As I stated earlier, Jesus willingly accepted this.
What did Jesus accomplish on the cross if he didn’t receive the just punishment for our sins? It’s because Jesus was the substitute that Christians have forgiveness. Jesus drank the cup of God’s just wrath and His blood was poured out for the forgiveness of sins. The whole Bible points to substitutionary atonement (a ram was provided in place of Isaac, the day of atonement in Leviticus). The whole sacrificial system in the Bible points to this
Well first of all the wages of our sin is death… he took that on himself and defeated death so that we can also be raised with Him…secondly He defeated the powers of darkness and made a path for us to overcome those powers as well…
If you believe he received the “just punishment” we deserve, do you believe he suffered eternal punishment in Hell?
Just realizing, I already watched this one! Great video! Thank you for sharing. Penal substitution is an illogical teaching. 🤷♀️😂
Yes it is! 😄
For God loved the world as so, he gave his only-begotten Son (before the foundationsof the world) , that whoever believes (and obeys) in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him. He who believes in him is not condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God. And this is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does what is true comes to the light, that it may be clearly seen that his deeds have been wrought in God. - John 3:16-21
Meaning the plan (before time) of sending His Son was a result of love!
Fantastic video. Good job, dear sister!
Keep fighting the good fight. God bless.
Thank you so much! God bless you as well! 😊
PSA goes farther back in the western tradition than you think. St Augustine and St Anselm described the core ideas: original sin, total depravity, infant depravity, et cetera.
I’m aware of satisfaction in Anselm, but PSA as articulated by the reformers is absent in historic understanding of the atonement
Excellent Candice - right on!
Thank you kindly!☺️
I’m a catechumen. In RCIA. Protestant for three years. God is good. I was obsessed with theology (as I can tell your passionate as well)
I will be following your channel closely. You’re very learned and well studied.
Dude.
I have so so so much to UNLEARN. It’s actually daunting to think about it.
Say all that to say. Thanks so much for your channel. I pray it grows and that you keep at it. Your talented. And people need these videos. God bless. Thanks again. seriously
Thank you for such encouragement! I’m glad that it is helping! That is the whole reason I’m passionate about it. I want to be a blessing to people! Thank you for your support! 😌
Great comparison
I thought penal substitution came from Anselm of Canterbury and was accepted by Catholics. Glad to know I was wrong about that.
Anselm taught a satisfaction theory but it is very different than PSA ☺️
@@EmbracingTradition100 Thank you for helping me recognize a gap in my understanding. Full disclosure, I'm EO so I don't think I'll be able to accept his teaching either, but I'm eager now to learn more about it.
@@david6ravy well honestly, the Catholic Church has not made any atonement dogma. I have problems with anselm and don’t hold to it. I prefer the orthodox understanding of atonement. For now I am free to do so.
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans.
This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth.
I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
@@Yjohanna I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds. Light of Light, Very God of Very God, of one essence with the Father, by Whom all things were made. Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried. The third day He rose again according to the Scriptures.
I just believe what the Orthodox Church teaches and has taught for nearly 2,000 years, regarding these things. The Church, clothed throughout the world as in purple and fine linen with the blood of martyrs, who produced and preserved the Holy Scriptures, who to this day produces holy men and women bearing witness to the Truth.
I do not follow the traditions of 16th century innovators like John Calvin.
I believe there is a softer view of PSA that is thoroughly traditional. It doesn't have to do with God punishing Christ insofar as "he's gotta whip somebody!" and that Christ loses his communion with God and becomes an object of God's hatred, but rather Christ mystically bears the suffering of mankind which is essence is a punishment due to sin -- and he uses that "punishment" to conquer the sin which occasioned it.
Traditional Catholic sources -- from the fathers to the scholastics -- acknowledge this.
St. John Chrysostom, commentary on 2 Cor 5:21:
"And that you may learn what a thing it is, consider this which I say. If one that was himself a king, beholding a robber and malefactor under punishment, gave his well-beloved son, his only-begotten and true, to be slain; and transferred the death and the guilt as well, from him to his son, (who was himself of no such character,) that he might both save the condemned man and clear him from his evil reputation"
St. Thomas Aquinas, commentary on Galatians 3:13:
"For Christ freed us from punishment by enduring our punishment and our death which came upon us from the very curse of sin... He was truly cursed by God, because God decreed that He endure this punishment in order to set us free."
St. Alphonsus Liguori, The Passion and Death of Jesus Christ:
“Thus all the wrath of God, which He had conceived against our sins, poured itself out upon the person of Jesus Christ; and thus we must interpret what the Apostle said, ‘He was made a curse for us’; that is, the object of all the curses deserved by our sins.”
Amen!
Yes, I believe PSA in its softer form is less egregious. But I still believe it isn’t handling the issue as faithfully as other atonement theories.
@@EmbracingTradition100 I don't think it's an "either-or" matter, either. Each theory has a truth to it. The atonement is a mystical reality, no one idea is going to exhaust its transcendent truth.
So I believe we should take them all into account, Satisfaction, Christus Victor, Ransom, AND the Catholic PSA.
Very good episode. I had not previously considered the errors penal substitutionary atonement led to.
If you believe this video then you believe that Jesus died for nothing, you are absolutely evil very far from the Holy Scripture, You don't need to listen to people who make mistakes, read the Holy Bible instead as it is for the Bible is the infallible Truth. Tradition can be twisted to fit for their comfort. The Bible clearly tells that all of us have sin and Jesus died for all of us to be saved. The qualification to enter heaven is perfection and all of us are sinners so we are meant to be sent to hell but because God loves us all so much, He send His Son Jesus to die for our sins and rose again after 3 days. Jesus is alive and our sins is dead. Choose Jesus not religion created by humans.
This video only leads you to distraction and doubt since its nothing but a point of view of human who are sinners not based on the Holy Scripture which is the Hard Truth.
I say again read your Bible and Believe that Jesus died for all sins.
@Yjohanna We’ve all heard this empty Protestant claim - “Jesus did everything so I can do nothing”. That, my friend, is profoundly unbiblical. We are meant to cooperate with God’s grace, with the Holy Spirit, and avoid sin, avoid temptation and grow in virtue. Thankfully more people are actually reading the entire Bible and realizing the truth of the Catholic faith.
@@pianoatthirty indeed what you say is correct on the part that we should also do are part as followers of Jesus and read the Bible because these facts are common sense unless in your denomination it is not. Many people on The New Testament memorize the entirety of the old testament, but are hypocrites, they failed to be guided by the Holy Spirit. "many are called but few are chosen"
@@Yjohanna False. Jesus died so that we might be saved. But we do have to get on the rescue ship.
You, on the other hand having seen the rescue ship are running around the island shouting "I am saved" and doing nothing else.
@BensWorkshop I get your point, and I can assure you that I believe in this scripture "faith without works is dead". Why do you put "might" there, Jesus' sacrifice is absolute so if you received Him surely you will enter heaven because Jesus Himself is the qualification John 14:6 "I am the way". There is this called being "born again" you can't enter if you are not one as it is stated, and only by receiving Jesus can saved you, and by being "born again" your actions and works will follow Jesus naturally because He is in your Heart, why do you put "might" there, you can't enter Heaven because you doubt Him. I believe that to live here on earth good works and denying of our selves to Christ is the way to live while we are still Alive but to enter Heaven, Jesus is enough not your good works because you are not qualified no matter how saintly you are if you don't have Jesus.
Revelation 1:5 - And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood.
Hebrews 9:22 - And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
No one claims otherwise….
Westerner here, THANK YOU for this message, have forwarded it to a lovely couple who are on fire for Christ but who have fallen victim to the heresies of the deceptive modernists.
Tenete Traditiones sister,
God bless.
Thank you! 😊 🙏
It is not either or when it comes to the atonement it is that God loves us but it is also that God has anger at sin..If you paint God as a God of love and forgiveness only then you are missing why God judges sin and condemns people to hell.
She covered that.
@BensWorkshop She covered the aspect of God's love and forgiveness and gave the example of the prodigal son. I never got anything regarding how God punishes sin or how Christ bore our punishment on the cross.
If God is never retributive, then what is the purpose of Hell, of casting people there, not just demons and Satan?
He is giving those people what they want, separation from him.
@deerhawk7788 The parables of Jesus don't describe them as wanting to be separated. "But Lord, didn't we...."
@ike991963 they may call him lord, but they did not do his will.
They in their hearts chose themselves over him.
Awesome video
Thank you! 😊
I think another problem with this view is it makes God the Father, the Executioner of Jesus rather than Jesus being the high priest that offers himself. To be sure there are verses the consent to support penal substitution and other verses that seem to contradict this. Ultimately, the atonement and the cross are mysteries that we can spend our whole lives entering into. I don't think any of us are going to really have a completely coherent understanding of it until we stand before God face to face. Until then, we will try to muddle through with the guidance of the Bride of Christ: the one, Holy, Catholic and apostolic church.
12:00
Jesus did take a beating… and although you may try and explain that away by stating it was accomplished at the hands of evil men… does it escape your notice that this was by the predeterminate will of God the Father? Acts 2:23, 4:27-28.
Does it also escape your notice that Jesus willingly laid down his life and could have foregone it? John 10:18 and Matthew 26:53.
No doubt - Jesus' death and Resurrection was part of God's plan. But this does not prove PSA. There is a difference between God the Father allowing Jesus to suffer death for our sins at the hands of man, and the doctrine of PSA where the Father is inflicting wrath on His Son.
@@lisnafulla,
Jesus did become a curse for us. He did become sin for us. He did bare our sins in his body.
He was forsaken. "My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me?" He didn't cry out in agony in response to the devil... but forsaken by God (IN OUR PLACE!)
Isaiah 53:10 KJVS
Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
As I stated earlier, Jesus willingly accepted this.
@@lisnafulla , she’s refuting the idea of God’s justice meaning somebody has to take a beating for God to be forgiving.
What I’m saying in response is 1) that Jesus did take a beating that led to our forgiveness which refutes her refuting (because God orchestrated it for our forgiveness). Let me also just say, God could have sent Jesus to just say we’re forgiven… God didn’t have to orchestrate the beating… BUT God did (Isa. 53:10) and 2) it was God whom Jesus said had forsaken Him. (Isa. 53:10 and Matt. 27:46)
@@70_X_7 Agreed. But this does not prove PSA. It only proves that Christ suffered the curse of death at the hands of men, so that man could turn to repentance through Jesus. Jesus in His humanity suffered without divine intervention (My God my God, why have you forsaken me). God did not interrupt Christ's suffering; rather the Father was pleased with Christ's obedience and self-sacrifice for the purpose of our redemption. The verses you offer do not prove or even suggest PSA, except by misinterpretation. The Greek and Hebrew texts are better understood that God permitted Christ to be bruised - not that God himself directly inflicted the bruising.
@@70_X_7 Correct. She refutes the PSA notion that God's mercy and forgiveness are based on retributive justice.
You are correct in that Jesus did suffer death and this led to our redemption (and redemption through Jesus was part of God's divine plan). But this does not equate to PSA. God sent Jesus to conquer death on our behalf out of love, mercy and grace, and out of forgiveness - not based on a retributive and forensic understanding of "justice". PSA twists God's grace to say that Jesus had to suffer the wrath of the Father in order to turn the Father away from wrath and anger. No. Jesus' sacrifice was purposed to turn MAN away from sin and towards repentance - not to turn the Father from wrath to mercy. The Father wanted to extend His children mercy from the very beginning. However, I do agree that Jesus' sacrifice was intercessionary (the Father was well pleased).
The wrath that Jesus suffered was that of the Jews who unjustly punished Him. The wrath Christ innocently suffered was also the curse of sin, i.e. death. Put another way, Jesus suffered wrath and punishment at the hands of sinful men and not at the hands of the Father. The Father merely allowed it in the same way that Jesus obediently allowed it even though both the Father and Son could have interrupted Christ's suffering at any time. They didn't so Jesus could show us that He has conquered death and so that man would turn to repentance.
“Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.”
Romans 5:9-11 KJV
So true.
The difference in understanding is that that verse doesn’t say that Jesus bore God’s wrath, it says that because of his blood, we will be justified, “aka” made righteous and by being justified we will be saved from the WRATH TO COME…..When we were enemies, not God was against us, we were against him…
Thank you for these videos from the reformed perspective. Even before becoming Catholic I have been staunchly against “reformed theology/Calvinism”. Your videos help educate so we can properly combat those heresies.
Thank you! 😊
Bravo! Btw, the Catholic equivalent of "energies" is basically "grace"
This is a good evaluation of PSA. However, not all protestants are Calvinists (you only quoted and referenced Calvinist/reformed protestants) nor do they all affirm PSA. This is a doctrine that definitely needs to be addressed, but it is unfair to imply that this is what all protestants or evangelicals believe.
I am speaking in very broad generalities and I said that in the video. I would say it is the majority view even among non Calvinists. Thank you for your comment 😊
@EmbracingTradition100 Unfortunately that is very true and I agree completely with all the arguments you made against PSA. My issue is that many religious channels become echo chambers because we only listen to those in our own camps and therefore the only things we ever learn about what others believe is the “broad generalities” we hear and we don’t actually understand what issues are at play in the faith traditions of others. God bless.
Sorry I meant Isaiah 53:4 not 53:3
I read it as I have seen Catholic and orthodox describe it, that Christ is not being punished by God but that that is how we perceive what is going on. It’s not true. He’s bearing our infirmities but to us we think he’s being punished by God. I encourage looking at sources that aren’t evangelical or Calvinist for an alternate interpretation than the one commonly given in the Protestant world. 😊 Blessings!
I'm not pro-PSA, but God is immutable and doesn't have emotions: I don't think that's according to scripture either? God is above all love. Saying that God is angry about sin and not sinners already contradicts your point of God not having emotions.
I tried to make the point that I was using human language to describe it. I didn’t mean to imply that God was actually experiencing those emotions in a human way. But it is the language he gives to explain what our sin is doing.
Repentance does not clean a person.
You are very wise beyond your years young lady! God is indeed Love, and tragically 'penal substitution' views him as a vindictive monster.
Thank you so much! 😊
Penal Substitution is Plain in Isaiah 53 and I don't see any other coherent sense of the whole of scripture. Isaiah 53 states that the Servant bore other's griefs, was smitten, afflicted by God, That he was pierced for Our transgressions and crushed for Our iniquities and upon him was the Chastisement that brought us peace. This same section was cited in the book of Acts 8:26-40 concerns a slice of Isaiah 53 as it refers to this figure. We must do Justice to the Biblical Data and acknowledge Jesus as the Rightful Figure who was cut off from God for sake of God's people.
Amen!
Isaiah 53 is misinterpreted as a prooftext for PSA. It is true that Christ suffered inequities. It is true that Jesus allowed this to happen as He said himself that He had the power to command angels to stop it. It is true that the Father - and the Truine God - planned for Jesus to become incarnate, suffer for our sins, and conquer death for our redemption. All this was by Grace. The Father permitted this to happen, just as Jesus did. This is what the text reads in the Greek and Hebrew translations. But there is a difference between the Father permitting man to crucify Jesus and the PSA notion that the Father is the one inflicting suffering and wrath onto his Son.
There are many biblical examples of God using man's bad acts to serve God's divine purpose. This does not mean that God is the person who performs those bad acts. God the Father did not crucify Jesus; just like Jesus, the Father merely allowed it to happen so as to serve his divine purpose of redemption and for Christ to be our mediator.
@@lisnafullait sounds like we disagree about semantics.
It was the will of God that Christ, he who was innocent, bare the sins of the people, and the means by which the death of God's only son for sake of redeeming the world did not acquit those who killed him of their sin nor justify it.
God predestined the cross (Acts 2:23, 4:27-28) but the hands were those of lawless men.
Ultimately, to deny PSA is to deny the necessity of Christ's innocent death in the place of sinners. God isn't Allah to which he will be appeased by one's bare intercession. Blood is required for forgiveness of sins. (Hebrews 9:22)(Hebrews 13:11-12)
@@garchomp-if7514 To deny PSA is not to deny that God was pleased with (or allowed) Jesus's sacrifice on the cross. That is a false binary. PSA denies God's sovereign divine power to forgive without retribution. If I can forgive my kids/wife/neighbor without seeking retribution, why would I assign an inferior ability to God?
@@lisnafullaGod requires blood for forgiveness of sins. Without blood there is no forgiveness of sins.
Again, I do not take the view common to Muslims that God can essentially say "it's good bro" without punishing sin. To uphold such a view fails to take account of God's character.
God in islam is the unknowable arbitrary will, having mercy on some, showing wrath to others
The soul that sins will die, and the blood atonement of Christ on our behalf upholds God's character as a God of Mercy & Justice.
Mormons believe PDA theory also.
This is great!
Good explanation. Now you just need to come to orthodox and your journey will be complete
Not all Protestants
❤❤
It would be helpful if you understood PSA.
PSA is not about God being a “big angry meanie.”
It is an affirmation of Absolute Divine Simplicity, God is (Just) since He is Just, He must dispense justice. The wages of sin is death, if He just let us go, He would be an Unjust judge. If someone breaks into your home and robs you, and the judge just let that person go, you’d be livid. God is Justice itself, without Him there is no Justice, the wages of sin is death so the wages of your sins must be paid for. Now say if someone paid the bail of the man who broke into your home, he can be set free. Christ did this for us on the cross, He paid the wages of sin, willingly. If we accept His payment for sin, it has been paid.
It has nothing to do with God being a big angry meany, it has to do with God being Just ontologically.
Christs life, death, and resurrection is about reconciliation. God became man, that man can become god. From the womb to the resurrection God became man to restore humanity to union with God.
The cross is not just about the Father punishing Christ on our behalf, that is entirely ridiculous. Christ became the Passover lamb that humanity can partake in to be freed from the bondage of sin.
I won’t go into the issue of ADS, but the fact that you are attempting to use ADS as apart of your argument is utterly ridiculous for several reasons. But primarily, the primary source we can look to for ADS is Thomas Aquinas, if you’ve ever read “what is redemption” by Francis De Sales, you’ll realize Thomas Aquinas did not teach PSA. So unless you want to claim that the reformers were better philosophers than Thomas Aquinas, making an argument from ADS is pointless.
You have to prove that the cross is primarily about Gods wrath being poured out on Christ, that’s the centerpiece of ADS. And that isn’t in scripture. Further, what does God do when Moses offers himself as a sacrifice to appease Gods wrath for Gods people?
“But now, if you will forgive their sin-but if not, please blot me out of your book that you have written.” But the Lord said to Moses, “Whoever has sinned against me, I will blot out of my book.”
Exodus 32:32-33 ESV
Moses says “God let me who is innocent die for them”, God says “no I don’t work that way.” But all of a sudden, when it comes to Christ God does work that way? No. God doesn’t punish the innocent on behalf of the guilty.
The wages of sin is death. He took that upon himself. We escape the wrath of God through the cross only in so much as we are saved from our sins and thus do not face it. Christ didn’t take the wrath of God. He took death sin, hell and the devil and destroyed them all. What justice is there in God if the display of it is the ultimate injustice. It’s illogical and immoral.
Yes!!! Thank you! 😊
@@ianrichardson9763 ADS is central to PSA, God is “Just” ontologically. Would you like to dispute that point specifically?
@@EmbracingTradition100 would you like to elaborate on how Christ willfully paying the wages of sin on the cross is the “ultimate injustice?”
Are you under the impression Jesus didn’t need to pay the wages of sin on the cross? Could we have been saved in some other way?
What is forgiveness. What is God’s forgiveness. Recall he said your sin I will remember no more. How’s that possible?……What happened when you forgive?….you affirm that the ‘me’ that was offended is ‘no more’, the me you see, you haven’t offended.
PSA as an explicit theology has been around since Anselm. It's roots go back through the Church Fathers, the NT to the OT, to Isaiah: "6 We all went astray like sheep; we all have turned to our own way; and the Lord has punished him for the iniquity of us all....
10Yet the Lord was pleased to crush him severely. When you make him a guilt offering, he will see his seed, he will prolong his days, and by his hand, the Lord’s pleasure will be accomplished.
(Isa.53.6-10 CSB)
It comes from a wrong translation in this case. It should be "God is pleased in he who was tortured; He would want to save him from beatings"(I'm translating from memory of Polish version cited by Bible scholar Wacław Hryniewicz, so I might have made a mistake, but the general meaning of this passage was around that). Or just "The Lord wants to save him from beatings" as in Septuagint.
@romualdandrzejczak4093 The Jewish Tanakh translation says, "5But he was wounded because of our sins, Crushed because of our iniquities. He bore the chastisement that made us whole, And by his bruises we were healed. 6We all went astray like sheep, Each going his own way; And the LORD visited upon him The guilt of all of us.”
@@ike991963 The text is actually ambigouous(as noted by Hryniewicz indeed) and so it allows both readings. The one cited by me Hryniewicz sees as more in accordance with his theology- he thinks it would be unjust for God if He made His beloved servant suffer and was pleased with that.
Isaiah 53 is misinterpreted as a prooftext for PSA. It is true that Christ suffered inequities. It is true that Jesus allowed this to happen as He said himself that He had the power to command angels to stop it. It is true that the Father - and the Truine God - planned for Jesus to become incarnate, suffer for our sins, and conquer death for our redemption. All this was by Grace. The Father permitted this to happen, just as Jesus did. This is what the text reads in the Greek and Hebrew translations. But there is a difference between the Father permitting man to crucify Jesus and the PSA notion that the Father is the one inflicting suffering and wrath onto his Son.
There are many biblical examples of God using man's bad acts to serve God's divine purpose. This does not mean that God is the person who performs those bad acts. God the Father did not crucify Jesus; just like Jesus, the Father merely allowed it to happen so as to serve his divine purpose of redemption and for Christ to be our mediator.
@lisnafulla So, God does not punish sin, is that you're contention?
Yes.
Great presentation on showing the evil of penal substitution. It truly is an untenable theory.
I suggest that you do some research on Trinitarian inclusion theology because some of your other comments and understanding of grace and salvation and separation from God are off.
Believing and confessing bring us to a place of awareness and experience of who we are as God’s children and our inheritance in Him, but the reality of that truth was completely done for us, to us, and as us, by Jesus Christ alone.
Scripture tells us that we were redeemed, justified, reconciled and born again BY the blood, death and resurrection of Christ. In His incarnation, Jesus became humanity. We were crucified with Him, we rose with Him and we ascended with Him to heavenly places.
The believing, confessing, sacraments, etc. bring the reality of that heavenly truth into our earthly experience. We were changed ontologically in and by Him, apart from our choice, believing and living it, is simply an expression in earth of what is already true in heaven.
Thanks for sharing.
What about the Jewish perspective. The western church ignores their contributions.
You mean from the perspective of what went on in the OT?
@EmbracingTradition100 jesus said same search the scripture testifies of me.
The Catholic understanding is based on the Jewish understanding.
What do Jews have to do with the atonement from the cross of Christ? They reject Christ as the Lamb of God.
@@The-Good-Life The first Christians were Jews.
If Jesus didn't die on the cross in our place to appease God's wrath then why did Jesus have to die on the cross at all. Why did he simply not just forgive us?
He had to live, if he died to appease God's wrath, The trinity is shattered, and Christ is in hell, we are saved by his merits, the cross is about love, as PST literraly turns God into a mayan god that needs to drink blood.
Because you hae a view of Jesus as God only and does not count His humanity. God asks for our obedience and true repentance. Remember the story of Abraham looking over Sodom and Gommorah before it's destruction. Abraham pleads with God to spare it if there were 40, then 30, then 20, then 10 good people among the thousands living there. Picture that scenario (as the NT is the OT revealed) as the world and Jesus pleading with the Father and talks the Father down to finding just ONE good-person; would He spare the World. Jesus in His humanity was that ONE good person. His death on the Cross was that perfect faith and obedience without questioning it. That is what spared us. God revealing to us we are not totally depraved and there is some redeeming quality left in humanity to explain His work of saving us.
God was not seeking His pound of flesh; but that perfect faith and obedience through the sometimes seemingly cruel and pointless suffering Jesus and we are ourselves face everyday.
@@recyclebin3798 What those who dismiss God's anger and judgement miss is our guilt We were guilty so the innocent died for the guilty the righteous for the unrighteous that we may be free from guilt(sin brings guilt) and aquited and declared righteous. God declares us innocent in a legal penal sense and we live out that reality through being conformed to the image of Christ.
@@39knights But Lot did not save the people of sodom and Gommorah he was just spared. So that analogy doesnt really work. Also my view does account for Jesus taking on humanity.
@@recyclebin3798 I didn't say Lot saved Sodom and Gomorrah. There were NONE found righteous in the city so they were destroyed. But why hasn't God destroyed humanity?? Because there is ONE righteous; and so we are redeemable nd God has spared the whole Earth.
In a theology where God is out for blood; that is a terrible God. That is a specific heresy where the God of the OT was a bloodthirsty maniac and the NT God is a loving God.
In either case the appeasement theology is a terrible theology based loosley on a very bad and extreme translation of 'paid the debt'. It is not a christian theology and has only appeared in the last century or so.
Stop looking for denominations. Denomination is from demon. All ism are sects. Protestanism, Calvinism, Orthodoxism, Catholicism, Mormonism, Jehovah witness.
Read the bible, close your ears from religion, and pray to Jesus your only Saviour.
Acts 2:38 (NET) Peter said to them, “Repent, and each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Colossians 2:8
8Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
*"Embracing tradition"*
Nah that’s Protestantism not Catholicism 😎
Catholic tradition is from the apostles who got it from Jesus who is God
@@EmbracingTradition100 the KJV Bible is mathematically encoded by God. Search for the information.
@@thevulture5750 you’re a KJV only? I’ve been there and done that 😌
@@EmbracingTradition100 I've told you that the KJV Bible is mathematically encoded by God. Whhat you do with that information is between you and God.
Catholics talk alot about tradition, theology and philosophy. What about Scripture?
Thou shall not make any graven images!
Did you say that god does not have emotions. I have to play this again to see if i herd it right. Maybe not. Check mate - Ohh yes you did. How hilarious. This is a joke. Please take a step back and let others do theologi.
That’s classic Christian doctrine, God is impassible. Orthodox Christian doctrine is a joke? Whatever you say.
@@EmbracingTradition100 Yes it is. The bible tells us over and over again that God feels and are angry or glad. If classic ortodox doctrine tells us that is a lie. >Then its a joke and you should rebuke it. Sola scriptura!!!
@@tompadori89 Solo
Sola Scriptura is not an intelligent position 😎 Sorry.
@@EmbracingTradition100 even intellegents jokes are still jokes. If anything contradicts the bible the bible is always right.
Great. Now everybody should read "Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul" by Simon Gathercole to hear both sides of the debate and make up their mind where they will stand.