Does the Crucifixion Do Anything?

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.ย. 2024
  • How does Good Friday "work" exactly? Is the Father pouring out His Wrath upon the Son? Or is there a better way of making sense of Calvary?

ความคิดเห็น • 318

  • @raeldc
    @raeldc ปีที่แล้ว +194

    Finally, the most decisive and concise rebuttal of the Penal Substitution Theory I’ve seen. Joe is my most favoritest Catholic Apologist.

    • @sheldonspider86
      @sheldonspider86 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      The only problem is that the New Testament explicitly states that the son both “left” heaven and “returned”, that the father is greater than the son, and that the son became a “curse” for us. The reason 99% of Christians understand it this way is because this is what the Bible clearly teaches. It takes mental gymnastics to interpret these things any other way which is why it took the church over 300 years to do so.

    • @marlam8625
      @marlam8625 ปีที่แล้ว +26

      @@sheldonspider86Gal 3:13 is just a way of saying that he redeemed us from the curse meant for us; He bore it all. His visceral physical punishment seems to be a curse. It’s similar way of looking at God’s wrath. It’s not an emotion that He fluctuates in and out of. Wrath is what it feels like to us when we get what we ought- or at times when it’s just a cross to bear like cancer- an opportunity to offer it to the Lord.

    • @mikelopez8564
      @mikelopez8564 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@sheldonspider86only Protestants believe penal substitution. So if they ALL subscribe to it, that is only about 25% of Christians

    • @Solideogloria00
      @Solideogloria00 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@sheldonspider86actually the majority of Christians did not believe in PSA now or through church history. I’m a Protestant but do not agree with the Calvin’s explanation of the cross for its not Biblical or Historical.

    • @patrickvalentino600
      @patrickvalentino600 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

      One should be suspicious of any man standing at a podium on a stage and calling it "church".

  • @jambangoni
    @jambangoni ปีที่แล้ว +50

    From someone who converted from this branch of Christianity after suffering some severe spiritual trauma due to following to the logical conclusions, THANK YOU.. andddd please cover this like ten more times so I can get it through my thick skull

  • @jakubratajczak9269
    @jakubratajczak9269 ปีที่แล้ว +58

    Brother, this video changed everything for me. I was born and raised catholic, I left the church for ten years, I've been a protestant for almost two years and came back into the Church year ago. I now realize I how deceived I was with these lies, these false doctrines. You've opened my eyes to the love our Lord has for us, and for me specifically. I've been struggling to see that, to understand and receive it. Thanks to you, one layer of lies has been taken away and now my vision is much clearer. God bless you abundantly, your family and ministry also!

    • @susand3668
      @susand3668 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Dear Fellow Pilgrim, welcome back!! God truly IS good!

    • @sovereigndayyouthkafir3943
      @sovereigndayyouthkafir3943 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Welcome home! It makes me weep and rage that Holy Mother the Church decided in the foolishness of her mortal leaders to move into Vatican II instead of simply bulwarking good catechism into excellent catechism as we see here from Joe. God love you, and God love Joe.

  • @SonOfThineHandmaid
    @SonOfThineHandmaid ปีที่แล้ว +68

    Joe, thank you so much for this. I grew up with Penal Substitutionary Atonement and it always struck me as false at worst, and missing something crucial at best. Over the past few years God has been calling out to me more and more insistently, but the harder I pursued Christ, the harder I was disappointed. And yet he still kept calling me. I feel like you've taken earplugs out of my ears so i can hear his voice clearly for the first time. I really feel like I've heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ for the very first time in my entire life. And the truth has set me free. I don't know if you'll ever read this, but thank you so much Joe, and God bless you. I wish there was a better way for me to express my gratitude, but I praise and thank God for you and your ministry.

  • @RandomThoughts77777
    @RandomThoughts77777 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +30

    I studied theology in the Gregorian in Rome for three years, but this is a much better explanation than we received there. We could save our dioceses a fortune by just clicking on TH-cam to watch this dude instead of sending seminarians to Rome! 😀

    • @susand3668
      @susand3668 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Good one! 😂

  • @gijoe508
    @gijoe508 ปีที่แล้ว +37

    Coming from a calvinist background converting to Catholicism the distorted view of God they taught me caused me a lot of issues with scrupulosity because of their idea of a vengeful God

  • @debralittle1341
    @debralittle1341 ปีที่แล้ว +46

    Wow wow wow! Ty for this video. I grew up in the Christian Reformed Church so I recognize some of what you said. Calvinist theology yes.
    I was welcomed into the Catholic Church in 1987. So what's wrong is corrected and I gain so much more. When people are looking into joining the Catholic Church they can't look at everything that's going on. If we look at people we will always be disappointed. Look at Jesus and His Church. It is so pure and rich and no limit to God's grace.

    • @franj1142
      @franj1142 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      Well said

  • @nathanp.claiborne8276
    @nathanp.claiborne8276 ปีที่แล้ว +51

    I found you through your interview with Pints with Aquinas.
    Criminally underrated Channel. Glad I found it.

  • @joshuabenes
    @joshuabenes ปีที่แล้ว +62

    This has been a delight to listen to and has really helped me to understand Jesus sacrifice much better. I've always struggled with the idea of Penal Substitutionary Atonement, and for many of the reasons you listed. My journey from Protestantism and toward the Catholic church continues.

    • @jambangoni
      @jambangoni ปีที่แล้ว +9

      I joined officially a few weeks ago. Not far into it yet obviously but has been a blessing

    • @susand3668
      @susand3668 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      Dear@@jambangoni, welcome home to the Church!! I converted 51 years ago, and I am still learning new wonders and blessings!

  • @JosephHeschmeyer
    @JosephHeschmeyer ปีที่แล้ว +54

    I refer to the clip (around 24:00) as R.C. Sproul, but I meant John Piper. Mea culpa!

    • @JoshN91
      @JoshN91 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      Hey Joe! I have a Purgatory question cued up for next time you are on Catholic Answers live. 😂 Your books The Early Church was the Catholic Church, and Pope Peter have been a huge help in my discussions with my Protestant friends and family! Appreciate you brother!

    • @jambangoni
      @jambangoni ปีที่แล้ว +4

      Hey joe, I’m a recent convert from Macarthur/Calvin Christianity to RCC..this was really helpful.. do you have any recommendations/readings/spiritual practices to help take this truer understanding from head to heart for someone who was essentially raised under penal substitutionary atonement ideology for years?

    • @crushtheserpent
      @crushtheserpent ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Mea maxima culpa 😆

    • @crusaderACR
      @crusaderACR ปีที่แล้ว

      ​@@jambangoni
      Recc for you:
      "What is Redemption? How Christ's Suffering Saves Us by Philippe de La Trinite"

    • @mikelopez8564
      @mikelopez8564 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I know Protestants of the Baptist persuasion who look at Jesus’ atoning sacrifice as the scapegoat practice and not the pascal lamb.

  • @craigsherman4480
    @craigsherman4480 ปีที่แล้ว +28

    I am current reading a book, recommended by Dr. Scott Hahn titled “What is Redemption? How Christ’s Suffering Saves Us by Philippe De La Trinite.” So far, I am loving this book and it goes along with what you are talking about.

  • @flipflopfantasys1961
    @flipflopfantasys1961 ปีที่แล้ว +34

    This was great, Joe! As a Catholic you "know" all of this, through liturgy, sacraments, reading, but I find understand the way the old testament - especially when you explained the blood thrown on the people by Moses - fascinating! Thanks and keep up the great work! I'll probably listen to this one a few times. 👍

    • @lyndavonkanel8603
      @lyndavonkanel8603 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Agreeing. I put this video in my "watch later" list.

  • @msakat1
    @msakat1 ปีที่แล้ว +19

    You are a consummate teacher: thorough, clear, and concise. Wow! I’m hooked.

  • @LarryOConnorMedia
    @LarryOConnorMedia ปีที่แล้ว +25

    THANK YOU for spending time explaining the CATHOLIC theology of the atonement. Too often all we hear from apologists is that we don't believe in the PENAL part, but we don't get a good explanation of what we DO affirm.
    You should take a look at the Penal Substitutionary Atonement portion of American Gospel 2. A future reaction or response video of that would be amazing!

    • @LarryOConnorMedia
      @LarryOConnorMedia ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Would love to see your response to this fascinating interpretation of our Lord's relationship with his mother: th-cam.com/video/SXm7GHbRwzA/w-d-xo.html

  • @susanct4378
    @susanct4378 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    Thank you for the Balm of Gilead. I'm so glad to be a Catholic, more than ever. As a protestant I dragged the penal substitutionary theory into my Catholic life. I knew no better. That damnable theory taunted me for decades. I was a very glum believer very often, sad to say. Last year I listened to the Eastern Orthodox view of the Sacrifice on the Cross, and looked into becoming a Byzantine Catholic. Further study changed my mind, so more sad confusion.
    You have done an enormous service to those of us weighed down by this major protestant error. Thank you. Christianity is now Good News.

    • @macbride33
      @macbride33 14 วันที่ผ่านมา

      May I ask why you didn't become Byzantine catholic

  • @ozoz2931
    @ozoz2931 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    I love the Orthodox understanding of Jesus's birth, life and death as the beginning of the new creation, Thy Kingdom come. Taking on human flesh He restores the creation lost in Adam. I've always had a problem with God NEEDING the crucifixion to forgive us. Thanks so much!

    • @joselongo1601
      @joselongo1601 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      Do you mean orthodox In the sense of sane doctrine or the orthodox church? For I learn this doctrine in the catholic church.

    • @crusaderACR
      @crusaderACR ปีที่แล้ว +3

      ​@@joselongo1601The Eastern Orthodox believe the same things they just call it and phrase it differently.
      This applies to 99.99% of stuff

    • @joselongo1601
      @joselongo1601 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@crusaderACR pero ozoz2931 pareció decir lo contrario.

  • @drewhansen8540
    @drewhansen8540 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +12

    Thank you so much for this! I am a recent convert to Catholicism, and this has been a subject I have been trying to understand more firmly. I tried reading books on the subject, but couldn’t find anything helpful. I’ve done some of my own writing on the subject because I couldn’t find the material anywhere. This is clear and concise, and you should make it a book! Most Protestants have no clue what the Catholic view on this is, and there is a need for people like you to proclaim the Catholic view in a clear way.

    • @quidam3810
      @quidam3810 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      I totally agree that it should be converted into a book !!!!

  • @michaeljefferies2444
    @michaeljefferies2444 ปีที่แล้ว +15

    Love the work you’re doing here. Showing from the scriptures why Catholic views are right rather than just appealing to authority (Aquinas said…). Well done!

  • @doranthe3rd
    @doranthe3rd ปีที่แล้ว +8

    This is such a fantastic explanation. I had listened to protestant preachers explain penal substitution and something always seemed off. Thank you for this BEAUTIFUL explanation and lesson. This makes me feel proud to be Catholic.

  • @theresalilienthal3709
    @theresalilienthal3709 ปีที่แล้ว +14

    This was a great explanation. I’ve pondered this without understanding for a long time.

  • @sarahmilesi4922
    @sarahmilesi4922 ปีที่แล้ว +15

    I love the way you present your material...so easy to understand and follow. Thank you!!

  • @rachelwilson2487
    @rachelwilson2487 4 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    I wish I could thumb this up infinitely many times. Such an excellent episode. Thank you Joe.

  • @derrick7442
    @derrick7442 ปีที่แล้ว +9

    Thank you so much for such an in-depth look into the cross and salvation through Christ.

  • @allisonsmith5449
    @allisonsmith5449 ปีที่แล้ว +9

    This is a great unpacking of .why the cross. and all it reveals and means. Thank you Joe. I want to be able to go back through what you have talked about and distill it down to something I can speak about confidently.

  • @Gerschwin
    @Gerschwin ปีที่แล้ว +12

    Shameless Potpourri is my new favourite!!!! Keep em coming.

  • @JoshN91
    @JoshN91 ปีที่แล้ว +13

    So excited to dive into this one. Penal substitutionary atonement is something I have been wanting to dive into for a few weeks now. Thanks Joe!

  • @Rue1008
    @Rue1008 6 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Yes, at around 38 - 39 , that is Piper speaking, I used to listen to him frequently - I have been a Calvinist for a few years, and was becoming more and more joyless ... since looking into Catholicism my joy and faith is growing and I feel a burden lifting. This was another weight removed: what an incredible articulation and rebuttal of PSA, and so much more ... very profound ... thank you so much Joe for your clear mind and your wonderful ministry !

  • @TruthHasSpoken
    @TruthHasSpoken 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    Had a protestant tell me a few weeks ago, *"Peter didn't know the meaning of the cross."* A shocking statement. He was having a hard time reconciling 1 Pet 3: 21 with his baptismal theology.

    • @Onlyafool172
      @Onlyafool172 4 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Typical, sola scriptura gets thrown away when it doesnt fit their theology, i am shocked, it makes sense why james and hebrews were almost thrown out of the bible by luther, litterraly contradicts sola fide

  • @serpentsepia6638
    @serpentsepia6638 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    At 14:33 This is where Protestants get the Bible wrong, not only at this specific part but all throughout the Bible. The verse isn't meant to be taken literal. God never forsakes Jesus, and Jesus isn't asking, why? "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?" is the first line in Psalm 22. The first line in the Psalm is the title, just like the first line in the Our Father is "Our Father". And the first line in the Hail Mary is "Hail Mary". What Jesus is doing is part of his Hebrew culture, it's a part of his upbringing. Jesus is reciting Psalm 22. Unfortunately, Protestants take everything in the Bible literally and are completely ignorant of the culture and context.
    *History and context. In the most general sense, Psalm 22 is about a person who is crying out to God to save him from the taunts and torments of his enemies, and (in the last ten verses) thanking God for rescuing him.*

  • @rivereuphrates8103
    @rivereuphrates8103 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Quickly becoming one of my most listened to shows. Thank you so much for going deep into the "mechanism" of the Cross and salvation. Also at the risk of being uncharitable, John MacArthur seems like a deeply angry guy, which may explain his theology.

  • @johnmendez3028
    @johnmendez3028 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    Excellent episode! Thank you Joel!

  • @SueOnEaglesWings
    @SueOnEaglesWings ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Thank, Joe! Excellent. Saved it to watch it again

  • @megtim
    @megtim ปีที่แล้ว +12

    Really enjoyed this episode Joe!! I’ve been seeing a lot of Calvinist/Reformed things lately so would you consider doing an episode on refuting the Calvinist view of free will?

  • @marlam8625
    @marlam8625 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    My new favorite channel! 👏🏻 great job!
    As an aside, homilies are in the mass and connect the readings with the gospel. Protestants have sermons; lessons on whatever they want to talk about.

    • @billymimnaugh3998
      @billymimnaugh3998 ปีที่แล้ว

      Ridiculous .The homilies at the Catholic Church are monotone , stupidity by pathetic “preachers “ that sound like it was written by a ten year old .

  • @IzakD8
    @IzakD8 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    So happy you've got a podcast now Joe. Really enjoying the content.

  • @braunerClan
    @braunerClan 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    This is my favorite (so far) of your podcasts. I knew penal substitution was wrong, but I could not figure out the right explanation. Thanks for exploring and sharing these Catholic truths.

  • @lucillemasters6791
    @lucillemasters6791 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Great teaching, makes so much sense. Thank you

  • @michaeljefferies2444
    @michaeljefferies2444 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    I think reformed thinkers usually reject the communication of idioms. That would explain why they don’t see the trinitarian problems.

  • @ToddJambon
    @ToddJambon ปีที่แล้ว +10

    Wow! This one's a marathon. You could probably have milked 3 episodes out of this one! Great content, though.

  • @andrewpearson1903
    @andrewpearson1903 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    It’s striking to see medieval affective piety alive and well in Sproul and MacArthur’s sermons. American "reformed" Protestants are trying to stir up the same emotions in the listener, with their words alone, that a twelfth-century devotional book or a Spanish penitential procession would have. Very good presentation.

  • @AllanKoayTC
    @AllanKoayTC ปีที่แล้ว +12

    John McArthur is consistently spewing errors. he's one of the worst Biblical scholars i've ever encountered, apart from one of the most anti-Catholic. so glad for your rebuttals and explanations to counter his erroneous teachings.
    (and good to see the increase in text size!)

  • @jeanw9160
    @jeanw9160 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Thanks again Joe for your always clear and concise teachings and for doing the hard work for us!! ❤ Best podcast ever!!

  • @EW-go1xw
    @EW-go1xw ปีที่แล้ว +3

    This video was very helpful. Thank you!

  • @borquelepork1057
    @borquelepork1057 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I remember many years ago hearing how the "Father toke out his wrath on Jesus" and felt so repugnant at that idea. Thanks for this great explanation of our beautiful Catholic view of Jesus sin offering on the cross. Thank you.

  • @michaeldeltz8229
    @michaeldeltz8229 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Great explanation! Thank you Joe!

  • @IRISHBee4
    @IRISHBee4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Definitely going to use this in my Bible study tomorrow.

  • @Vision-uf5mm
    @Vision-uf5mm 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Thank you. I pray more will listen 🙏🏽✝️🙏🏽

  • @IM-tl7qv
    @IM-tl7qv ปีที่แล้ว +6

    I want to see Cy introduce you as the host of Shameless Potpourri next time you're on Catholic Answers live.

  • @jimnewl
    @jimnewl ปีที่แล้ว +6

    St. Athanasius answered this many, many centuries ago. Read "On the Incarnation."

  • @halleylujah247
    @halleylujah247 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    I have been watching several of your shows and I am enjoying them! Do you have a Patreon or locals? You should get one if not. I suggest locals people will support you. Also do you do interviews?

  • @Sharkman1963
    @Sharkman1963 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Dr. Scott Hahn does a wonderful job explaining the connection between the Last Supper and the Crucifixion in his video "The Fourth Cup": th-cam.com/video/v1yAvrVoYzo/w-d-xo.html
    And the late Father Richard John Neuhaus' ruminations on the Crucifixion in his excellent book "Death on a Friday Afternoon" are esse Tualatin reading. I highly recommend both.

  • @deepusnttf432
    @deepusnttf432 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Praise God. Eye opener from God to me. I feel he did spoke to me through this video. Indeed he did. May God use you more and more for his kingdom. God bless ❤

  • @w.Raphael
    @w.Raphael 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Great video. Thank you very much Joe! God bless you.

  • @kellyedington8716
    @kellyedington8716 ปีที่แล้ว

    How dare you apologize. We came to you for this. This is part of your offering. ✌️❤️‍🔥✝️

  • @akeilareid3195
    @akeilareid3195 หลายเดือนก่อน

    As a protestant converting to Catholicism, thank you for this.

  • @chintagada1
    @chintagada1 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Excellent 👌👌👏👏🌹🌹

  • @heidigabalski6335
    @heidigabalski6335 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Thank you Joe ❤ this was very helpful 🙏

  • @ΕλέησονΑμαρτωλόν
    @ΕλέησονΑμαρτωλόν ปีที่แล้ว +2

    I like Christus Victor theory myself. Good video

  • @francishaight2062
    @francishaight2062 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Beautiful! Thanks for taking the time here, Joe! Given this excellent and unhurried unpacking, how can we fail to fall in love with our Lord all over again? So it is that His sacrifice out of divine love is this beginning and end of history and shows us the path to Heaven. Amen.

  • @janiceervin428
    @janiceervin428 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    This is something I’ve NEVER been able to reconcile. It’s why I’m afraid of God. “The wage of sin is death” so apparently someone has to pay!” So God incarnated to sacrifice himself.
    And knowing God is all powerful, omnipotent, capable of seeing past, present and future, WHY would he design a world so flawed, knowing satan would be who he is, and that humanity would fall, necessitating a Jesus horrific sacrificial event.. ? I’ve never understood.
    It would have been lovely to simply have had a Jesus event in history, sans the crucifix.😔❤
    If anyone can offer me additional insight I will be forever grateful. Thank you.

    • @EC42904
      @EC42904 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I would highly recommend reading C.S. Lewis’ The Problem of Pain for further insights on why it all “had” to be this way, difficult as it is for us to accept.
      You can find it for free with a simple Google search as it’s in the public domain now, and he has a way of explaining these things without seeming trite or sappy.

  • @trewise1072
    @trewise1072 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    “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.”
    ‭‭Romans‬ ‭3‬:‭25‬-‭26‬ ‭

  • @grantlauinger8663
    @grantlauinger8663 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    This is probably the best explanation and refutation of penal substitution that I've heard. However, I would be interested in hearing how you understand the typology between the Abraham and Isaac story and the crucifixion because there does seem to be a clear link.
    Also, how to properly understand the "wrath" of God. Is it simply the Father's discipline of His children or something more?

  • @BrianGondo
    @BrianGondo ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Hi Joe, does Isaiah 53 especially v10 add credence to the idea of 'the Father pouring out His Wrath upon the Son?' or the penal substitution model?

  • @pattyserrano9339
    @pattyserrano9339 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I didnt even know i understood this the wrong way, thanks for the video Joe!

  • @tookie36
    @tookie36 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    25:55 "You stole fizzy lifting drinks! You bumped into the ceiling which now has to be washed and sterilized, so you get nothing! You lose!"

  • @timcapes5000
    @timcapes5000 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Thanks, Joe; I really enjoyed listening to this teaching. Could you go into more detail about how Jesus, as the Lamb of God, takes away the sin of the world? I think St Peter describes it as bearing our sins in his own body on the tree (1 Peter 2:24) - this is something that seems difficult to understand. How can sins be taken away or borne?

  • @jonathanellis5811
    @jonathanellis5811 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    41:47 is when he starts describing what IS a proper view of the cross

  • @ericclark2158
    @ericclark2158 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thanks so much, Joe! This is such a solid summary. This needs to be on your short list of podcats to bookify. I would give this to beloved Calvinist friends.

  • @DeanHiltonYoung
    @DeanHiltonYoung 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thank you so much for this podcast. It has been life-changing for me. God bless you.

  • @ericson5913
    @ericson5913 ปีที่แล้ว

    No no not long enough episode. Awesome episode thank you Gid bless.

  • @doubled5159
    @doubled5159 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Really great stuff!

  • @kimdooley4589
    @kimdooley4589 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Thanks for making this video, this has shown me a lot that I've never heard before. Can you please recommend any other resources that go into depth on this topic? Thanks

  • @GloriaJesu
    @GloriaJesu 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This has been my favorite episode so far. I watched it twice!

  • @duckgrow
    @duckgrow 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I had never heard this view before, growing up on penal substitution. I have to seriously think this over.

  • @terrynboucher3219
    @terrynboucher3219 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This was the best explanation of this topic that I have ever heard! ❤

  • @addelrosario9839
    @addelrosario9839 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Great explanation.
    Just one question. Since it was a self sacrifice. And since it was His Will, does that exonerate the Jews and the Romans? They could not have done the crucifixion if He didn't allow it?

    • @JosephHeschmeyer
      @JosephHeschmeyer ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Good question. No, the fact that God makes use of our evil actions (for His own good purposes) doesn't make our actions not evil. As Joseph said in the Old Testament, "As for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today" (Gen. 50:20).

  • @WeakestAvenger
    @WeakestAvenger หลายเดือนก่อน

    I'm glad you talked about that passage in 2 Corinthians, that Christ becoming sin is likely a Semitism from Paul, and he is saying that Christ became a sin offering, not that our sins were imputed to Christ. Peter does say that Christ bore our sins in his body (cf. Day of Atonement), but that doesn't seem to be what Paul is talking about in 2 Cor.
    However, I do wish we could dispense with the "at-one-ment" language. I think we need to get beyond the English word "atonement" (invented for the sake of translation) and talk about the meaning of the underlying Hebrew and Greeks words, which have to do with expiation, with cleansing.
    In fact, this is something that so far is missing from your model (forgive me, I'm jumping the gun a little, as there is 20 minuted left; I will edit this if you end up explaining it more clearly). Christ's blood cleanses us from all unrighteousness (1 Jn 1). This is what is going on with the "life is in the blood" language. The life cleanses the death. Leviticus 16:30 explicitly describes the result of the atoning work on the Day of Atonement as cleansing Israel from all their uncleannesses.
    This is the mechanism I haven't seen yet in your model. When you talked about the theater shooting, those men showed their love because their sacrifice has the intention of saving their dates from bullets. But if they uad just said, "I'm going to show you how I love you by jumping in front of a bus for you!" that wouldn't be loving. It woud be just crazy.
    Similarly, in order for Christ's self-sacrifice to he loving, it has to do something. He bears our sins, takes them away, and cleanses us by his blood. And Athanasius says that because Jesus joined his immortality with our mortality in his incarnation, all the power of death was expended in his death. This defeats the devil and demons, who held people in the fear of death, and it paves the way for our resurrection (at least, if i understand correctly).
    Again, forgive me if I am jumping the gun and you get to these kinds of points in the last 20 minutes.
    Edit: I got to the end, and I'm still struggling to see a mechanism in your model for what exactly is accomplished on the cross. You brought up a lot of Scriptural language and imagery, but forgive me, it still seems like you didn't quite explain how Christ's self-sacrifice gets us from A to B. It sounds like the "I will jump in front of a bus" kind of sacrifice I mentioned above.
    Maybe related to the Passover lamb and entering into God's covenant? But it isn't clear. And while the Passover is certainly relevant, I don't think we can leave out the Day of Atonement connection, seen in the language of Christ as our high priest, his blood cleansing us, and him bearing our sins in his body.

  • @kurzantema
    @kurzantema 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Now I understand! Thank you! It was long but it needed to be. Hats off for bringing opposite views without strawmaning

  • @jenniferaldridge2468
    @jenniferaldridge2468 7 วันที่ผ่านมา

    I grew up in the church of Christ and I’ve heard the statement that the father turned his back on Jesus when he was on the cross. Then another church I attended for many years talked about God’s wrath being poured out on Jesus when he was on the cross. I haven’t found a Bible verse that says exactly any of those things. Thank you for mentioning 2 Corinthians 5:21. But what about Isaiah 53:5? And why does Romans have the word imputed if that isn’t correct? Can someone lead me to videos about those two? Thanks 😊

  • @s37erasmus
    @s37erasmus 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    This is absolutely brilliant work! Well done. A number of years ago I was trying to refute an author who was sympathetic to Christus Victor who was trying to blame PSA on St. Anselm and Aquinas. This presentation would have come in really handy.
    What would you say, however, to Reformed who bring up proof texts like Gal 3:13 (cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree) and Isaiah 53:5 (he was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities)?

  • @daviddabrowski01
    @daviddabrowski01 หลายเดือนก่อน

    RC Sproul goes through some serious mental gymnastics. It’s fascinating when Protestant apologists are walking a very tight rope their voice changes. It’s that “please believe me, edge of tears, I’m grasping at straws” voice. It’s usually followed by hyperventilation and ended with some 2 or 3 word phrase to punctuate what is essentially babble.
    He may as well have said the color of yellow is square.

  • @billpletikapich5640
    @billpletikapich5640 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Joe, you did a great job organizing this material. McArthur and Sproul's theories on penal substitution are wrong in so may ways. The more they try to explain, the worse it gets. Their stories just don't sound plausible - maybe something a Jr. HS kid would come up with if he didn't pay attention in class or read the material. I certainly can't imagine someone with Philosophy or Psychology classes believing this view.

  • @kimberlywilliams7578
    @kimberlywilliams7578 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Thank you, Joe. At 23:56, and again at 27:27, the commentary you attributed to RC Sproul is actually John Piper, not Sproul.

  • @albinoadrianocordeiro9929
    @albinoadrianocordeiro9929 10 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Thank you so much for this video. It was soul healing. An Idea: for the good of the souls, make a clip from 58:16 to 59:43 so we can make it viral.

  • @Jaallam
    @Jaallam ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Great Video presentation as usual!
    One thing I struggle with is the language used to say that we have been imprisoned and that our Lord Jesus bought us with his precious blood. Hmmm...he paid his blood to whom? How this freed us?

    • @Nolongeraslave
      @Nolongeraslave ปีที่แล้ว +3

      "You were bought with the precious blood of Christ's death. He was a pure and perfect sacrificial Lamb. (1 Peter 1:19).

    • @Jaallam
      @Jaallam ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@Nolongeraslave bought from whom?

    • @Nolongeraslave
      @Nolongeraslave ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Jaallam Just do the Bible study on the topic. It seem you do not believe the Apostle. For the start try Leviticus and the book of Hebrews I think.

    • @Jaallam
      @Jaallam ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@Nolongeraslave actually because I believe I am asking this question in all honesty for I don't know the answer and you haven't provided any either. For whom did Jesus pay his blood?

    • @Nolongeraslave
      @Nolongeraslave ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Jaallam I am not sure whether you are a Christian. If you are then you must be familiar with the book of Leviticus and the book of Hebrews. These two books answers your question. (See Hebrews 2:17)

  • @DavidSupina
    @DavidSupina ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Enjoying the video, but just a quick reminder that a talk preached at a Protestant sermon is typically referred to as a sermon rather than a homily.

  • @scottforesman7968
    @scottforesman7968 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I don't believe that the Father 'poured out His wrath' on the Son. However, I do believe that you neglected (and it is a serious neglect) any mention of blood atonement. You said, in effect, that the Father was pleased with Christ's obedience. That puzzled me. Obedience to what? Obedience FOR what? The Catechism gives little (I think 4 paragraphs) definition of meaning of the Cross. You didn't either, and I again, I am still confused and profoundly disappointed.

  • @j8000
    @j8000 หลายเดือนก่อน

    12:24 why would the trinity dissolve if the son left heaven? Are the entities "joined at the hip" so to speak?
    They have to be on the same plane of existence to remain in union?
    I get that the father turning on the son doesn't work, but why specifically does shared planar location in heaven necessary?

  • @djo-dji6018
    @djo-dji6018 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    May God have mercy of all those Reformed apologists for their stubborn mistakes.

  • @jattebaleyos116
    @jattebaleyos116 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Hello Joe, I noticed while listening to one of Ven. Fulton Sheen's talks that he held a view of the atonement that included some aspects of penal substitution along with the Catholic view. Is it acceptable for a Catholic to believe in some concepts of penal substitution in their understanding of the atonement?

  • @gailvalleymartialarts
    @gailvalleymartialarts 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Another thing that confuses me is Isaiah 53,10 "Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him with pain."

  • @benjaminjohnson2848
    @benjaminjohnson2848 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Listening to Reformed theology is so yuck. Grew up in it. Decided God didn't love me because I didn't love and couldn't make sense of what I was taught the Bible said. Glad to know now that wasn't the case. Believing i was unlovable almost killed me. Thank you for putting this together.

    • @benjaminjohnson2848
      @benjaminjohnson2848 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Re: "when we suffer we don't say God is pouring out His wrath on us..."
      I heard things like that regularly as a kid in the Reformed tradition. I also had wrath poured out on my body regularly, in the name of godliness and love and discipline. Rushdoony and Dobson were my parents' advisors. I think that recognizing this to be true of generations of American Christians and ex-Christians helps explain some things about our culture.

  • @elbertlyon8495
    @elbertlyon8495 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thank you for this! Tremendously informative! God bless you!

  • @thenarrowdoor7
    @thenarrowdoor7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I love this thank you . But i have one thing i dont understand why st paul said without the shedding of blood there is no forgivness of sin ?? While we saw in many places that there was foregivness without blood . Can someone explain this to me please

  • @abrahamphilip6439
    @abrahamphilip6439 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Herein is the point :
    Isaiah : " -- with his stripes we are healed " The stripes that man gave him out of sin become his own (he who had no sin became sin for us) BY which he redeems man unto the Biblical words "I Hurt & I Heal" (Job) The words that underscores the Communion, The Body & Blood of the STRIPED Christ received through FAITH ,-- THE GRACE,
    Now Faith would be when we pick up Our own crosses to follow him , amounts to Equating with him through following his two Commandments in spirit & in truth , in which hang the law & the prophets
    So, the stripes that man gave him he uses to redeem is the reason why "It pleased God to Bruise him " (Isaiah) Not for the bruises itself but for its Fruit, For this he had to RESURRECT, that he did 'cause Our sins could not hold him down, he been found stronger than Sin, in other words there is no Sin that he cannot remove,
    So redemption is basically a Conversion act not a "Substitution (magical) act" as generally believed by Protestants & this underlying Error has its origins through Protestantism's leaving of the Faith theologically through "Faith Only " that James specifically says is not, unto mis interpretation Paul (the reason why Martin Luther rejected James cause it was a hinderance to his erranous view/beliefs) & the philosophies that arise out of the leavens becomes to another Christ another Gospel
    Give unto God what is to God - FAITH , surely not a Leavened/Corrupted Faith,
    "My God, My God why do you forsake me Now, Jesus came for Adam (Son of God) & his seed (mankind) so by the words he was echoing the last words of Adam, God did not forsake him, the answer to his words , came by the act of the one on the Cross, Is it not ,?
    The Cross denotes Sacrifice, & when we pick up own own crosses , it involves sacrifices, like him,
    Hell is where Sin governs, it acts as a filter preventing anyone with itself (sin) going to the Father (the reconnecton after Adam sinned)

  • @charleswinters1827
    @charleswinters1827 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Herbert W Armstrong was the guy who twisted toward a Wednesday crucifixion.

  • @Moranimal23
    @Moranimal23 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Subscribed

  • @andrewscotteames4718
    @andrewscotteames4718 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    As a Texas Tech Red Raider, you almost converted me on the spot with the Mahomes reference 😂
    I’ve been a Chiefs fan because of him ever since y’all drafted him.
    I like the episode, I’ve been a Christus Victor guy myself for a few years after rejecting PSA as logically incoherent and morally offensive.

    • @andrewscotteames4718
      @andrewscotteames4718 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Also, I would point out that the idea of what makes the sacrifice necessary is underdeveloped in this video. You touched on it, but did not fully flesh it out.
      He redeems humanity by taking on and perfecting human nature. The cross plays a role in this perfection as it shows extreme obedience, but it’s primarily the vehicle for shedding his blood, which gets applied to us through the Eucharist. We who eat the sacrifice are then both joined to the cross and then ontologically transformed into what we consumed (you are what you eat) by transmutation, as St Justin Martyr puts it.
      Anyway, excellent episode. It makes me feel much better to know that I am not the only one who picked up on the inadequacy and lunacy of PSA.

    • @awuriefnejqwjmnwn4960
      @awuriefnejqwjmnwn4960 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I wonder what Christian tradition you are a Part of that you reject Penal Substitutionary Atonement without being Catholic. Are you Orthodox? I am confused. I always thought that PSA and Protestantism go hand in hand

    • @andrewscotteames4718
      @andrewscotteames4718 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@awuriefnejqwjmnwn4960I am a Lutheran

    • @susand3668
      @susand3668 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Dear@@awuriefnejqwjmnwn4960, naw, Protestants are all over the place! They have no one, single cogent theology! The only unifying factor in their beliefs is that the Catholic Church is Wrong.

  • @Frst2nxt
    @Frst2nxt ปีที่แล้ว +1

    "Thursday" evening is the beginning of the Jewish day of preparation. Evening and morning. Thus HE was crucified the same day as the first Eucharist.
    The father of lies led us to death, but the TRUTH laid HIS life down to reestablish us forever.
    The FOUNDATION of our submission to the justice and mercy of GOD is manifest as a PERSON in CHRIST.
    And, as a person ought not to repent of repentence, one doesn't want to hurt one they love a second time, thus we should be mindful not to crucify CHRIST afresh. HE was crucified once for all, but each new time we return to our vomit, like a dog, it is like a new treatment of HIM as if recrucifying HIM.
    CHRIST helps us to be partakers on HIS restoring the original violated balance.
    We were separated from the Glory of GOD in Paradise, but unite ourselves back to HIM in Gethsemane.

  • @JesusChristKing
    @JesusChristKing 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Faith in the death by crucifixion, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ saves a man’s soul. As Christians, we must emanate Christ regarding every walk of life. Thus, just as Joseph and Mary consecrated Jesus in the Temple when He was a child, so must we consecrate our children. However, understand that this act of faith did not require water baptism, and that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist during His adulthood to receive the Holy Spirit from His Father. Therefore, so must we at our age of maturity be water baptized in the holy name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by consciously repenting to be saved. Otherwise, just as faith without works is dead, what purpose does baptism serve without willful repentance?