As a Protestant who grew up with penal substitution, the key passages that have shifted my views on this are Leviticus 16 (especially verses 30, 33); Hebrews 9-10; 1 John 1:7, 9; and Psalm 51. There are more, but those have been especially important for me. Edit: And also Fr. Stephen De Young helping me to see Passover as covenantal instead of penal.
I am also someone who has come out of PSA, having been taught it as equal to the gospel growing up. It is an incredibly destructive false teaching. I am thankful God rescued me from it. I have done a lot of work over the past year with regard to PSA and what the scriptures actually say. Having said that, I wanted to commend you for the wonderful combination of scriptures you put together here. Together, they pack a powerful punch. Thanks for sharing
Thank you for doing this talk. I found it to be edifying. As someone who was raised Protestant and taught that false teachings such as PSA were the gospel, I find the Orthodox views to be much more consistent with what the scriptures actually say.
For more quality Orthodox content from Fr.Joseph Lucas PhD, visit his new TH-cam channel "Apostolic Tradition" youtube.com/@apostolictradition?si=49dC_QhKA_2OdOPQ
this was a great chat! That quote from Saint Gregory of Nazianzus is one of my favourites: Now, since a ransom belongs only to him who holds in bondage, I ask to whom was this offered, and for what cause? If to the Evil One, fie upon the outrage! If the robber receives ransom, not only from God, but a ransom which consists of God Himself, and has such an illustrious payment for his tyranny, a payment for whose sake it would have been right for him to have left us alone altogether. But if to the Father, I ask first, how? For it was not by Him that we were being oppressed; and next, On what principle did the Blood of His Only begotten Son delight the Father
This is an outstanding resource, brother! I am a Protestant who has been working hard at proclaiming the true nature of the atonement in my circles here and it's done alot of good so far. PSA is rampant and unfortunately central to the faith for many Christians today. Thank God that He is breaking down those barriers, though. The true nature of a Protestant should be to protest anything departing from the teachings of the church and God in His Word, and that means every Protestant should vehemently deny exhaustive penal substitution alongside the reformed dogmatics.
Always enjoy your posts! PSA is for most American Christians, especially theological conservatives, the default understanding of the Atonement. It's kind of in the water. This makes it hard for many to view it differently.
Great video! Can never have enough Orthodox videos on the subject of the atonement online. Would love to see a video tying together the Atonement with the Eucharist demonstrating clearly from the Fathers and from the Scriptures how they go together. "Proclaiming the death according to the flesh of the only begotten Son of God, that is, of Jesus Christ, and confessing his resurrection from the dead and his ascension into heaven, we celebrate the unbloody sacrifice in the churches, and we thus approach the spiritual blessings and are made holy, becoming partakers of the holy flesh and of the precious blood of Christ, the Savior of us all." - Cyril of Alexandria 444 AD
Adonis this quote from St.Cyril is powerful. Yes, the connection between the Atonement and Eucharist is worthy of its own show. Thanks for sharing this fam! ☦️
@@TheTransfiguredLifeIn context of a new show on the Relationship of the Atonement and the Eucharist, please include/discuss the Jewish and early Greek Christian concept and understanding of “zakhor” and “anamnesis”… a living memory which makes present again, sacramentally, mystically, yet really, all the saving events of the past in the life of Jesus Christ… Excellent show, hosts and guest speaker were very knowledgeable and engaging! Thank you 🙏🏼☦️
34:32 Father Joseph was spot on with this, there is never a roman courtroom typology or parable alluded too in the scriptures but rather a King making his judgement. You can actually connect that to the parable of the unforgiving servant, the parable emphasizes the mercy of the King toward the pleading for forgiveness and the necessity of acting the same toward your neighbor. The parable clearly demonstrates that, rather than the King needing his debt satisfied and paid for.
"For if when we were enemies we were reconciled through the death of His Son, much more, having been (past tense) reconciled, we shall be saved by His life."
Amen. That happened to me one evening in June of 1993, and I was literally changed in a moment, and forever. I continue to grow, but I first had to be born again and indwelt by the Holy Spirit. That happened while I was driving. He changed me in ways I never even wanted to be changed. That was the day of saving repentant faith. He doesn’t go back on His promises, and He who began the ultimate good work in me will be faithful to complete it. I could not have really understood all of this until I experienced that new birth. I was reborn, adopted, and began to grow. God will never disown me, and He is the one who is continuing to transform me throughout this life, until I am perfected in His physical presence in eternity. Throughout 18 years of sacraments, I had none of this. It only happened through surrender and trust in God and His ability to take over and transform me. So, just as that passage teaches, I have already been completely and permanently reconciled with God through the death of Jesus, and from that decisive moment on, God has promised to complete His work of complete and final salvation through the resurrected life of Jesus. If I had not experienced that second birth, and the accompanying invasion of the Holy Spirit, I suppose I would still be trying to achieve something like a gradual process of theosis, and never actually experiencing permanent reconciliation with the Triune God, and the true transformation that comes from that decisive moment. I truly wish that same salvation, today, for everyone reading this. Simply surrender, and trust completely in Him alone for His eternal mercy and grace, instead of trusting in yourself. In that moment, you will begin to experience the unstoppable, life changing transformation that only God can cause. Then you will begin to see His word in a whole new light, and you will begin to see Romans 5:8-11 as the awesome, magnificent truth that it is to everyone who has already received the free gift of eternal life.
Great episode, I’d love to hear a more in depth conversation on issues the orthodox view of atonement has with PSA. I’m not orthodox but an eastern leaning Christian who has been studying the atonement. After many years believing PSA it is hard to break and hard to grasp the differences at times.
Yes, Protestant here , when Jesus says, "...my God, why have you forsaken me?" It would seem that He became sin on the cross, and God looked away? I need help to understand the Orthdox view on this .
@ also a Protestant here, who grew up singing “How Deep the Father’s Love For Us” lol. What really started to shift my perspective on this was reading the entirety of Psalm 22 (which Jesus is quoting on the cross when He says “why have You forsaken me”). The writer actually ends the psalm by emphasizing that God has *not* hidden His face from His suffering one! That got me thinking about the Trinitarian implications of one Person of the Trinity “forsaking” another Person of the Trinity, and the bricks fell from there. In fact, unless I’m missing it, the Bible never once says that the Father turns His face from *anything*. Kinda mind blowing for me lol
It seems to me that many Catholics and even Protestants are saying the same thing about the atonement as said in this video. Good examples are Scott Hahn and NT Wright. They both insist that to see the Father as being angry at the Son on the cross is to see the exact opposite of reality. I think it is a wonderful thing to see the spreading of a corrected view of redemption throughout the Christian landscape.
Yes, which is to say that those RC’s and Protestants are coming to accept and teach the ancient, patristic, primarily Eastern patristic, teachings that the Orthodox Church…and ONLY the Orthodox Church… has been teaching from the beginning. But do they acknowledge that fact? Not so much. They prefer to present it as if it’s primarily his discovery (NT Wright) or the constant teaching of the Vatican (Scott Hahn). Very misleading. Only Holy Orthodoxy has consistently presented correct interpretation of Scripture and dogmas about God.
Salvation is the whole process, from the Lord's drawing us to him, through the Lord's justification and our reconciliation with him, through the daily walk in the Spirit with a contrite heart, to the resurrection of the glorified body. It is all by grace and by the empowerment of the Spirit. It is available to all who will surrender to the Lord Jesus and let him do his work in us. This assured salvation is the covenant in his blood. It is God's promise, not our achievement.
By the graciousness of God . Turn to God / Draw near to God / by confession / prayer /fasting … remaining obedient and humble and loving from your heart .
Eastward leaning Protestant here, why does Jesus say, "...My God, why have you forsaken me?" It seems like God turns away His comfort, at least, making Jesus feel all alone. I assume that is where the Protestants say that Jesus became sin, and God could not look upon Him? Hence, He became a substitute for our sins. Somebody, please, explain to me why Jesus cries this out at the end.
@@bradleyperry1735 He neither gave a quote where he was getting it from, nor would that quote be an innovation, for the Bible and the Church Fathers teach the same.
Anselm’s model isn’t heretical or against the Orthodox faith, it’s just inadequate as an apologetic model, but the theme is still valid. St Nicholas Kabasilas uses the same system and language to describe the atonement but puts it in the full Orthodox context.
Can someone explain how we are to understand Jesus taking upon Himself our sin, when sin is just forgiven? How am I to understand it as an Orthodox? Was it a literal taking? Symbolic? It was a real death He died, so maybe His suffering death (the consequence of sin) in a way is spoken of as taking on Himself our sin?
Sin can be forgiven, but the CONSEQUENCES of sin, death, is NOT something that can be dealt with by we mere mortal humans, it's going to take the immortal God who cannot die to take upon himself that death on the Cross and overcome death by death itself. Hades cannot accept and cannot contain he who is everlasting and immortal, so by taking upon himself our sins, he took upon himself the everlasting consequences of that sin and then smashed the gates of Hades which could never contain him. So, yes, Jesus died - in the flesh, in his humanity, but since he could never die in his divinity, he was raised from the dead in his humanity. So then, all who are united to him through baptism die as he did and are raised as he was raised. His victory over sin and death then becomes, through him, our victory. Does this help?
@@Fr.JonathanIvanoffSorry, maybe I’m missing something. Christ defeated sin by and through His sinlessness. Is this the manner which it can be understood that He took upon Himself our sins is how I’m understanding this? There’s a sense in which he took “upon himself our sins” That’s where I’m fuzzy
55:27 Can the father provide clarification with regard to his stated acceptance of substitutionary language? By substitution, doesn’t he intend to communicate the idea of “on behalf of” rather than “instead of” or “in place of”? As far as I can tell, if one uses this word in the way it is commonly used today which is consistent with its dictionary definition with regard to what Christ did for us, they would have to affirm He died and will remain dead eternally or He died and is suffering in hell eternally, depending on whether they believe in eternal death or eternal conscious torment. In case what I am trying to communicate isn’t clear, let me put it another way. Did Christ die eternally? If your answer is no then you must deny that He did that in our place. Did Christ die and is now consciously suffering eternally? If your answer is no then you must deny that He did that in our place. Do we still die in this life? If your answer is yes then you must deny Christ did that in our place. Do we still suffer in this life? If your answer is yes then you must deny Christ did that in our place.
Mattew 23 I believe Jesus is trying to discourage pride in leadership and leaders the Greatest was Servant of all and He is my eternal master no man on earth my father in Heaven is my Forever Guide
Good, that's exactly what he meant. The Pharisees were very prideful, and loved titles and honors. Jesus was speaking against this, not looking ahead in time and telling us not to call priests "Father" as some Protestants claim.
The issue with the Cain and Abel example is that the Bible clearly does not contain every interaction between God and man. Of course He had to instruct them. James is clear that all wisdom, knowledge, and understanding come from the Father.
God's justice is distributive (settings things in right order) rather than retributive. usually, the term God's justice colloquially refers to an imported concept of medieval satisfaction and honor which is decidedly not God's justice. God does not need, as Fr said in the video
God upholds His “justice” (this is a human term as far as God goes) in that He upholds the penalty for sin (death) whilst undoing it entirely. But we must remember that death is not an active punishment, but a natural consequence of separation from Gods Life as well as a gift to preserve man from becoming like the demons, immortal and evil. When we speak of death as a punishment, this is just one limited way of speaking.
@@joshf2218 Making a punishment a mere "consequence" is removing God's role as Judge and Superintendent of all that happens. The wages of sin is not just a consequence, wages are something deliberately paid to someone for a reason. Karma does not replace God.
It’s more that a ransom was paid to death, rather than a debt payment. Ransom generally means a payment made to release someone from the bondage of slavery or some form of captivity. Debt is more about paying off what is due or owed (paying one’s debt to society). This language of “paying a ransom to death” is the language used to describe how Christ’s death on the Cross “ransomed” us from death by destroying it through his resurrection. In Jesus Christ we had been freed and are no longer slaves.
It sound like you think of death as of some entity that exists, has substance and deserves attention, ransom, food, water, etc. Death can be compared with the darkness that does not have existence and substance as it is, in reality, absence of light. So the death is absence of life, or to be more precise, absence of life giving Spirit. How can you communicate to the darkness to make it happy and eventually go away.? By turning the light switch on. And that action would NOT make it happy as it is not an entity, it does not have feelings. How did the Lord "pay debt to the death".? It is not entity, it does not have existence... so... what He did was to pour out His life giving Spirit that make death disappear. We, however, need to claim His free gift in order to attain life as He does not want to impose Himself onto anyone and trample over His gift to the men - free will. This is where juridical model of atonement fails miserably and to whom ransom was actually paid remains unanswered - none of the possibilities make sense. Thus, Orthodox Church, in preservation of the original Christian doctrine, preaches Theosis in place of juridical model.
No, I do not think that death is literally some sort of entity. I was just stating what the Ransom theory is getting at in general. The personification of death or the grave is metaphorical language used by Paul himself “oh death where is thy sting, oh grave where is thy victory. “ 1 Corinthians 15:55-57. More importantly, the language used in the theory is not one of paying off a debt, but a ransom. There is a big difference between the two, but this is still using metaphorical language. Jesus didn’t literally show up with a bag of gold to pay death the ransom to set us free. In the Ransom theory death accepts Christ’s body into it (into the grave), but is destroyed by His Life. Before Christ we were held captive by death. In Christ we have been “ransomed” from death and the fear of it.
Edit: Ransom theory is one of several ways the atonement has been described by the Fathers of the church. Today most Orthodox Christians tend to use the Christos Victor and Recapitulation views of the atonement, but do not necessarily reject Ransom theory. The hymn we sing for Pascha (Easter) says it all in a nutshell: Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by death and upon those in the tombs bestowing life”.
The wrath of God is absolutely throughout the scriptures. It is of course an image, a metaphor but to completely jettison the language seems to be really bad. Gods wrath being poured out on the son absolutely has to be rejected though.
Jesus Christ absolutely received the wrath of The Father on the tree ; He became a CURSE for His people, as cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree; He died under the curse of sin; He became sin on the cross and thus the earth was darkened. To deny the wrath of God is to deny the doctrine of Hell, is to deny God's hatred of sin and thus sinners, and is to deny the justice and holiness of God.
The penalty is death and Christ has defeated death. If you watched the entire video Dr.Joseph mentioned that the language of wrath is used in scripture but what's happening on the cross is God the Father satisfying his wrath in order to forgive us. The Father forgives freely and Christ offers himself voluntarily.
We are inclined to sin, because we have turned away from God. We lost the way, and followed our own way, falling short of what is whole. When Jesus came, to represent what is Godly on Earth, what did we do? In our sinful way, we killed him! Jesus showing the way, and then being killed, was the embodiment of not just goodness in Earth, but also an embodiment of our sin on Earth. As such, Jesus died for our sins. Our sins were placed upon him. We saw the consequence. And so, we have a good chance to turn around our ways. To repent. This is what I have come to understand from reading Orthodox and Catholic texts, avoiding the PSA magic trick trap 🪤
I was baptized into the Orthodox Church yesterday morning!
God grant you many years! Welcome Home!
Wow, what joyful news! May God grant you many years! Welcome home brother! ☦️❤️
Glory to God!
Congrats 🎉
Theosis is the most encouraging idea I never had any concept for in Reformed protestantism
Yes correct. Wesleyanism is closest to it….but the Reformed always had it in for him.
As a Protestant who grew up with penal substitution, the key passages that have shifted my views on this are Leviticus 16 (especially verses 30, 33); Hebrews 9-10; 1 John 1:7, 9; and Psalm 51. There are more, but those have been especially important for me.
Edit: And also Fr. Stephen De Young helping me to see Passover as covenantal instead of penal.
I am also someone who has come out of PSA, having been taught it as equal to the gospel growing up. It is an incredibly destructive false teaching. I am thankful God rescued me from it.
I have done a lot of work over the past year with regard to PSA and what the scriptures actually say. Having said that, I wanted to commend you for the wonderful combination of scriptures you put together here. Together, they pack a powerful punch. Thanks for sharing
Great episode!
@@IdolKiller Appreciate it my brother! ☦️
@@IdolKiller By the way thanks for slaying Calvinism. Because of you I have never looked at Total Depravity the same lol
You guys can get together and discuss Dositheus maybe?
@@Kinjiro the gnostic or the one over the Synod of Jerusalem?
@@IdolKiller the Synod of Jerusalem :)
Thank you for doing this talk. I found it to be edifying. As someone who was raised Protestant and taught that false teachings such as PSA were the gospel, I find the Orthodox views to be much more consistent with what the scriptures actually say.
I’m ex Protestant soon to be baptized into the Orthodox Church God willing+ thank you for all you do guys.
Wow, it's around the corner. Welcome home and thank you! ☦
God bless you and thank you for listening to TTL!
This was really helpful as a new Orthodox convert who is continuing to sharpen the understanding of these important theological issues.
Agreed !
For more quality Orthodox content from Fr.Joseph Lucas PhD, visit his new TH-cam channel "Apostolic Tradition"
youtube.com/@apostolictradition?si=49dC_QhKA_2OdOPQ
Glory to Jesus Christ!
this was a great chat!
That quote from Saint Gregory of Nazianzus is one of my favourites:
Now, since a ransom belongs only to him who holds in bondage, I ask to whom was this offered, and for what cause? If to the Evil One, fie upon the outrage! If the robber receives ransom, not only from God, but a ransom which consists of God Himself, and has such an illustrious payment for his tyranny, a payment for whose sake it would have been right for him to have left us alone altogether. But if to the Father, I ask first, how? For it was not by Him that we were being oppressed; and next, On what principle did the Blood of His Only begotten Son delight the Father
Foundational episode!
Thank you! Excellent stuff!
This channel continues to edify and inspire me
Beautifully said
Saving this for later. Apologies for not having subscribed earlier.
This is an outstanding resource, brother! I am a Protestant who has been working hard at proclaiming the true nature of the atonement in my circles here and it's done alot of good so far. PSA is rampant and unfortunately central to the faith for many Christians today. Thank God that He is breaking down those barriers, though. The true nature of a Protestant should be to protest anything departing from the teachings of the church and God in His Word, and that means every Protestant should vehemently deny exhaustive penal substitution alongside the reformed dogmatics.
Always enjoy your posts!
PSA is for most American Christians, especially theological conservatives, the default understanding of the Atonement.
It's kind of in the water. This makes it hard for many to view it differently.
Great video! Can never have enough Orthodox videos on the subject of the atonement online.
Would love to see a video tying together the Atonement with the Eucharist demonstrating clearly from the Fathers and from the Scriptures how they go together.
"Proclaiming the death according to the flesh of the only begotten Son of God, that is, of Jesus Christ, and confessing his resurrection from the dead and his ascension into heaven, we celebrate the unbloody sacrifice in the churches, and we thus approach the spiritual blessings and are made holy, becoming partakers of the holy flesh and of the precious blood of Christ, the Savior of us all."
- Cyril of Alexandria 444 AD
Adonis this quote from St.Cyril is powerful. Yes, the connection between the Atonement and Eucharist is worthy of its own show. Thanks for sharing this fam! ☦️
@@TheTransfiguredLifeIn context of a new show on the Relationship of the Atonement and the Eucharist, please include/discuss the Jewish and early Greek Christian concept and understanding of “zakhor” and “anamnesis”… a living memory which makes present again, sacramentally, mystically, yet really, all the saving events of the past in the life of Jesus Christ… Excellent show, hosts and guest speaker were very knowledgeable and engaging! Thank you 🙏🏼☦️
34:32 Father Joseph was spot on with this, there is never a roman courtroom typology or parable alluded too in the scriptures but rather a King making his judgement. You can actually connect that to the parable of the unforgiving servant, the parable emphasizes the mercy of the King toward the pleading for forgiveness and the necessity of acting the same toward your neighbor. The parable clearly demonstrates that, rather than the King needing his debt satisfied and paid for.
Wonderful thank you!
Super good 👍🏼 !
Thanks !!
You are all very kind !!
Thank you great video ☦️☦️☦️
I've just been discussing this with some of our parish's catechumens.
This is a goldmine. Thanks so much!
Your welcome! Also, you have been here since day one. We appreciate you! ☦
🎯 🔑 🔥 🕊
Thank you, Father Joseph, Father Jonathan, and Luther. Happy New Year!
Happy new year and God bless you!
Amazing episode! Thank you 🙏🏻
Fr.Joseph 🙌🙌🙌🙌
Thank you!
"For if when we were enemies we were reconciled through the death of His Son, much more, having been (past tense) reconciled, we shall be saved by His life."
Amen. That happened to me one evening in June of 1993, and I was literally changed in a moment, and forever. I continue to grow, but I first had to be born again and indwelt by the Holy Spirit. That happened while I was driving. He changed me in ways I never even wanted to be changed. That was the day of saving repentant faith. He doesn’t go back on His promises, and He who began the ultimate good work in me will be faithful to complete it.
I could not have really understood all of this until I experienced that new birth.
I was reborn, adopted, and began to grow. God will never disown me, and He is the one who is continuing to transform me throughout this life, until I am perfected in His physical presence in eternity.
Throughout 18 years of sacraments, I had none of this. It only happened through surrender and trust in God and His ability to take over and transform me.
So, just as that passage teaches, I have already been completely and permanently reconciled with God through the death of Jesus, and from that decisive moment on, God has promised to complete His work of complete and final salvation through the resurrected life of Jesus.
If I had not experienced that second birth, and the accompanying invasion of the Holy Spirit, I suppose I would still be trying to achieve something like a gradual process of theosis, and never actually experiencing permanent reconciliation with the Triune God, and the true transformation that comes from that decisive moment.
I truly wish that same salvation, today, for everyone reading this.
Simply surrender, and trust completely in Him alone for His eternal mercy and grace, instead of trusting in yourself. In that moment, you will begin to experience the unstoppable, life changing transformation that only God can cause.
Then you will begin to see His word in a whole new light, and you will begin to see Romans 5:8-11 as the awesome, magnificent truth that it is to everyone who has already received the free gift of eternal life.
Aww! I arrived late.☦️🙏🏾
Glory to God.
Thanks for tuning in chief!
Glory to God
Another transfigured life W
Great!
Thanks again Lu. A great video. I didn't realize how different the Protestant and Orthodox views were until I read Two Views of the Cross.
Thanks Cindy. Appreciate it fam! ☦️
Yes, her book on this subject is fantastic! Simple, short and straight to the point.
Great episode, I’d love to hear a more in depth conversation on issues the orthodox view of atonement has with PSA. I’m not orthodox but an eastern leaning Christian who has been studying the atonement. After many years believing PSA it is hard to break and hard to grasp the differences at times.
PSA can be understood in an Orthodox manner, we would just reject the damning of the Son by the Father. His blood did atone for all sin in the world.
Does anybody have a citation for St Cyril discussing the Father turning away His face? I’d love to read that more closely!
Yes, Protestant here , when Jesus says, "...my God, why have you forsaken me?" It would seem that He became sin on the cross, and God looked away? I need help to understand the Orthdox view on this .
@ also a Protestant here, who grew up singing “How Deep the Father’s Love For Us” lol.
What really started to shift my perspective on this was reading the entirety of Psalm 22 (which Jesus is quoting on the cross when He says “why have You forsaken me”). The writer actually ends the psalm by emphasizing that God has *not* hidden His face from His suffering one!
That got me thinking about the Trinitarian implications of one Person of the Trinity “forsaking” another Person of the Trinity, and the bricks fell from there.
In fact, unless I’m missing it, the Bible never once says that the Father turns His face from *anything*. Kinda mind blowing for me lol
It seems to me that many Catholics and even Protestants are saying the same thing about the atonement as said in this video. Good examples are Scott Hahn and NT Wright. They both insist that to see the Father as being angry at the Son on the cross is to see the exact opposite of reality. I think it is a wonderful thing to see the spreading of a corrected view of redemption throughout the Christian landscape.
Yes, which is to say that those RC’s and Protestants are coming to accept and teach the ancient, patristic, primarily Eastern patristic, teachings that the Orthodox Church…and ONLY the Orthodox Church… has been teaching from the beginning. But do they acknowledge that fact? Not so much. They prefer to present it as if it’s primarily his discovery (NT Wright) or the constant teaching of the Vatican (Scott Hahn). Very misleading. Only Holy Orthodoxy has consistently presented correct interpretation of Scripture and dogmas about God.
Let’s go
☦️☦️☦️
Salvation is the whole process, from the Lord's drawing us to him, through the Lord's justification and our reconciliation with him, through the daily walk in the Spirit with a contrite heart, to the resurrection of the glorified body.
It is all by grace and by the empowerment of the Spirit. It is available to all who will surrender to the Lord Jesus and let him do his work in us.
This assured salvation is the covenant in his blood. It is God's promise, not our achievement.
By the graciousness of God . Turn to God / Draw near to God / by confession / prayer /fasting … remaining obedient and humble and loving from your heart .
Eastward leaning Protestant here, why does Jesus say, "...My God, why have you forsaken me?" It seems like God turns away His comfort, at least, making Jesus feel all alone. I assume that is where the Protestants say that Jesus became sin, and God could not look upon Him? Hence, He became a substitute for our sins. Somebody, please, explain to me why Jesus cries this out at the end.
🥄☦️🥄
Can your guest give the exact quote and source where St Anselm supposedly teaches an "innovation", contrary to Scripture and the Church Fathers?
He explicitly stated what the innovation was…
@@bradleyperry1735 He neither gave a quote where he was getting it from, nor would that quote be an innovation, for the Bible and the Church Fathers teach the same.
Anselm’s model isn’t heretical or against the Orthodox faith, it’s just inadequate as an apologetic model, but the theme is still valid.
St Nicholas Kabasilas uses the same system and language to describe the atonement but puts it in the full Orthodox context.
@ That is incorrect.
What is incorrect?
Please be specific and concise because I can give you exact passages from St Nicholas.
Can someone explain how we are to understand Jesus taking upon Himself our sin, when sin is just forgiven? How am I to understand it as an Orthodox? Was it a literal taking? Symbolic? It was a real death He died, so maybe His suffering death (the consequence of sin) in a way is spoken of as taking on Himself our sin?
Sin can be forgiven, but the CONSEQUENCES of sin, death, is NOT something that can be dealt with by we mere mortal humans, it's going to take the immortal God who cannot die to take upon himself that death on the Cross and overcome death by death itself. Hades cannot accept and cannot contain he who is everlasting and immortal, so by taking upon himself our sins, he took upon himself the everlasting consequences of that sin and then smashed the gates of Hades which could never contain him. So, yes, Jesus died - in the flesh, in his humanity, but since he could never die in his divinity, he was raised from the dead in his humanity. So then, all who are united to him through baptism die as he did and are raised as he was raised. His victory over sin and death then becomes, through him, our victory.
Does this help?
@@Fr.JonathanIvanoffSorry, maybe I’m missing something. Christ defeated sin by and through His sinlessness. Is this the manner which it can be understood that He took upon Himself our sins is how I’m understanding this? There’s a sense in which he took “upon himself our sins” That’s where I’m fuzzy
How did Jesus reconcile us to God? He did something unique.
There would be no suffering. If we could be perfectly faithful to God.
55:27 Can the father provide clarification with regard to his stated acceptance of substitutionary language? By substitution, doesn’t he intend to communicate the idea of “on behalf of” rather than “instead of” or “in place of”? As far as I can tell, if one uses this word in the way it is commonly used today which is consistent with its dictionary definition with regard to what Christ did for us, they would have to affirm He died and will remain dead eternally or He died and is suffering in hell eternally, depending on whether they believe in eternal death or eternal conscious torment.
In case what I am trying to communicate isn’t clear, let me put it another way.
Did Christ die eternally? If your answer is no then you must deny that He did that in our place.
Did Christ die and is now consciously suffering eternally? If your answer is no then you must deny that He did that in our place.
Do we still die in this life? If your answer is yes then you must deny Christ did that in our place.
Do we still suffer in this life? If your answer is yes then you must deny Christ did that in our place.
Call no man father what does the bible mean ?
What is the context of that particular verse? I don't mean where it's located, I mean what was Jesus teaching when he said it? How do you read that?
Mattew 23 I believe Jesus is trying to discourage pride in leadership and leaders the Greatest was Servant of all and He is my eternal master no man on earth my father in Heaven is my Forever Guide
Good, that's exactly what he meant. The Pharisees were very prideful, and loved titles and honors. Jesus was speaking against this, not looking ahead in time and telling us not to call priests "Father" as some Protestants claim.
The issue with the Cain and Abel example is that the Bible clearly does not contain every interaction between God and man. Of course He had to instruct them. James is clear that all wisdom, knowledge, and understanding come from the Father.
That is speculation. Throughout Genesis, many people offer sacrifice, and we have no idea what it looks like. It would help to know what sacrifice is.
the first time He came as the lam the second time He is the judge
Sola patristica is a problem among some Orthodox converts who adopt pseudo calvinist doctrines and terminology.
How does the Orthodox view of the atonement deal with God's justice?
Listen in 6:30 to 9:30
Also, 16:45 to 17:45
It doesn't.
Although it can be argued this is not really the actual Orthodox view.
God's justice is distributive (settings things in right order) rather than retributive.
usually, the term God's justice colloquially refers to an imported concept of medieval satisfaction and honor which is decidedly not God's justice. God does not need, as Fr said in the video
God upholds His “justice” (this is a human term as far as God goes) in that He upholds the penalty for sin (death) whilst undoing it entirely. But we must remember that death is not an active punishment, but a natural consequence of separation from Gods Life as well as a gift to preserve man from becoming like the demons, immortal and evil. When we speak of death as a punishment, this is just one limited way of speaking.
@@joshf2218 Making a punishment a mere "consequence" is removing God's role as Judge and Superintendent of all that happens. The wages of sin is not just a consequence, wages are something deliberately paid to someone for a reason. Karma does not replace God.
I've heard that the debt was paid to death itself- is this Orthodox?
It’s more that a ransom was paid to death, rather than a debt payment. Ransom generally means a payment made to release someone from the bondage of slavery or some form of captivity. Debt is more about paying off what is due or owed (paying one’s debt to society). This language of “paying a ransom to death” is the language used to describe how Christ’s death on the Cross “ransomed” us from death by destroying it through his resurrection. In Jesus Christ we had been freed and are no longer slaves.
It sound like you think of death as of some entity that exists, has substance and deserves attention, ransom, food, water, etc. Death can be compared with the darkness that does not have existence and substance as it is, in reality, absence of light. So the death is absence of life, or to be more precise, absence of life giving Spirit. How can you communicate to the darkness to make it happy and eventually go away.? By turning the light switch on. And that action would NOT make it happy as it is not an entity, it does not have feelings. How did the Lord "pay debt to the death".? It is not entity, it does not have existence... so... what He did was to pour out His life giving Spirit that make death disappear. We, however, need to claim His free gift in order to attain life as He does not want to impose Himself onto anyone and trample over His gift to the men - free will. This is where juridical model of atonement fails miserably and to whom ransom was actually paid remains unanswered - none of the possibilities make sense. Thus, Orthodox Church, in preservation of the original Christian doctrine, preaches Theosis in place of juridical model.
No, I do not think that death is literally some sort of entity. I was just stating what the Ransom theory is getting at in general. The personification of death or the grave is metaphorical language used by Paul himself “oh death where is thy sting, oh grave where is thy victory. “ 1 Corinthians 15:55-57. More importantly, the language used in the theory is not one of paying off a debt, but a ransom. There is a big difference between the two, but this is still using metaphorical language. Jesus didn’t literally show up with a bag of gold to pay death the ransom to set us free. In the Ransom theory death accepts Christ’s body into it (into the grave), but is destroyed by His Life. Before Christ we were held captive by death. In Christ we have been “ransomed” from death and the fear of it.
Edit: Ransom theory is one of several ways the atonement has been described by the Fathers of the church. Today most Orthodox Christians tend to use the Christos Victor and Recapitulation views of the atonement, but do not necessarily reject Ransom theory. The hymn we sing for Pascha (Easter) says it all in a nutshell: Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by death and upon those in the tombs bestowing life”.
He self-published…..it’s $40 for paperback on Amazon. That’s incredibly steep!!
The wrath of God is absolutely throughout the scriptures. It is of course an image, a metaphor but to completely jettison the language seems to be really bad. Gods wrath being poured out on the son absolutely has to be rejected though.
Even Paul clarifies that he speaks in a human way when he mentioned the wrath of God.
Jesus Christ absolutely received the wrath of The Father on the tree ; He became a CURSE for His people, as cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree; He died under the curse of sin; He became sin on the cross and thus the earth was darkened.
To deny the wrath of God is to deny the doctrine of Hell, is to deny God's hatred of sin and thus sinners, and is to deny the justice and holiness of God.
The penalty is death and Christ has defeated death. If you watched the entire video Dr.Joseph mentioned that the language of wrath is used in scripture but what's happening on the cross is God the Father satisfying his wrath in order to forgive us. The Father forgives freely and Christ offers himself voluntarily.
We are inclined to sin, because we have turned away from God. We lost the way, and followed our own way, falling short of what is whole. When Jesus came, to represent what is Godly on Earth, what did we do? In our sinful way, we killed him! Jesus showing the way, and then being killed, was the embodiment of not just goodness in Earth, but also an embodiment of our sin on Earth.
As such, Jesus died for our sins. Our sins were placed upon him. We saw the consequence. And so, we have a good chance to turn around our ways. To repent.
This is what I have come to understand from reading Orthodox and Catholic texts, avoiding the PSA magic trick trap 🪤
Wonderful, thank you!