PSA, an essential Christian doctrine.

[ladodgers6]

This doctrine of PSA - Penal substitutionary atonement, I believe is an essential doctrine to Christianity. I believe firmly this is a doctrine taught throughout scripture. I am also aware there are those out there who do agree with some aspects of PSA, mainly, they disagree that Jesus endured the wrath of the Father. If one loses this truth, you lose the gospel.

I believe these couple of verses may be a good place to start.
Psalm 22:1
My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?
Far from my help are the words of my groaning.

Matthew 26:39,
And He went a little beyond them, and fell on His face and prayed, saying, “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; yet not as I will, but as You will.”

Excellent post and very crucial topic for our understanding what God accomplished in his Son for his people. The key passages in understanding this precious and glorious doctrine of Grace and Mercy is found in Isaiah 53.
​

1 Who has believed what he has heard from us?
And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2 For he grew up before him like a young plant,
and like a root out of dry ground;
he had no form or majesty that we should look at him,
and no beauty that we should desire him.
3 He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief;
and as one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.


4 Surely he has borne our griefs
and carried our sorrows;
yet we esteemed him stricken,
smitten by God, and afflicted.
5 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.
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.

7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted,
yet he opened not his mouth;
like a lamb that is led to the slaughter,
and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent,
so he opened not his mouth.
8 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?
9 And they made his grave with the wicked
and with a rich man in his death,
although he had done no violence,
and there was no deceit in his mouth.

10 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.
11 Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied;
by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant,
make many to be accounted righteous,
and he shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will divide him a portion with the many,
and he shall divide the spoil with the strong,
because he 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.
​

This is the most Gracious Act of Love on display for the whole Cosmos to witness! Christ taking our place under God's wrath for our iniquities, that are imputed to Christ, and his righteousness imputed to the transgressors! The marvelous exchange! This how God can be the just and the justifier. How God can justify the ungodly through Faith Alone; they receive and rest upon this announcement of good news, in what Christ accomplished on that Cross that afternoon! ​

 

[Foghorn]

Excellent post and very crucial topic for our understanding what God accomplished in his Son for his people. The key passages in understanding this precious and glorious doctrine of Grace and Mercy is found in Isaiah 53.
​

1 Who has believed what he has heard from us?
And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2 For he grew up before him like a young plant,
and like a root out of dry ground;
he had no form or majesty that we should look at him,
and no beauty that we should desire him.
3 He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief;
and as one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.


4 Surely he has borne our griefs
and carried our sorrows;
yet we esteemed him stricken,
smitten by God, and afflicted.
5 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.
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.

7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted,
yet he opened not his mouth;
like a lamb that is led to the slaughter,
and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent,
so he opened not his mouth.
8 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?
9 And they made his grave with the wicked
and with a rich man in his death,
although he had done no violence,
and there was no deceit in his mouth.

10 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.
11 Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied;
by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant,
make many to be accounted righteous,
and he shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will divide him a portion with the many,
and he shall divide the spoil with the strong,
because he 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.
​

This is the most Gracious Act of Love on display for the whole Cosmos to witness! Christ taking our place under God's wrath for our iniquities, that are imputed to Christ, and his righteousness imputed to the transgressors! The marvelous exchange! This how God can be the just and the justifier. How God can justify the ungodly through Faith Alone; they receive and rest upon this announcement of good news, in what Christ accomplished on that Cross that afternoon! ​

Amen!

 

[ladodgers6]

It's been here since the OT sacrifices (post #16).

Exactly great example is the passover.

 

[Josheb]

This doctrine of PSA - Penal substitutionary atonement, I believe is an essential doctrine to Christianity. I believe firmly this is a doctrine taught throughout scripture. I am also aware there are those out there who do agree with some aspects of PSA, mainly, they disagree that Jesus endured the wrath of the Father. If one loses this truth, you lose the gospel.

I believe these couple of verses may be a good place to start.
Psalm 22:1
My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?
Far from my help are the words of my groaning.

Matthew 26:39,
And He went a little beyond them, and fell on His face and prayed, saying, “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; yet not as I will, but as You will.”

I am not in favor of starting with Psalm 22:1. Verse 14 would be better. However, I suggest Isaiah 53:10 is better than either.

But the LORD was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief; If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand.

The LORD crushed the Lord. The Lord endured his Father's crushing. God put him to grief. His soul was placed as an offering and specifically an offering for sin. The one who knew no sin was made sin, and made sin for us, and made sin for us that we might become God's righteousness (2 Cor. 5:21). Christ suffered, and suffered as the just for unjust, and the just suffered for the unjust to bring us close to God (1 Pet. 3:18). The one who was closest to God died to bring us close.

These are some of the places I would begin.


I also have two other thoughts. 1) PSA is a man-made doctrine. It's a good doctrine but it's not the only perspective on the matter and rather than think of the diversity as either/or or specific points all necessary in direct opposition to one another try thinking about the overlapping or shared terrain. They are not all wholly mutually exclusive of one another, and 2) they all occur in the context of the fact the word "atonement" as we think of it in modern vernacular is not what the scriptures actually use. The Hebrew word, "kaphar" simply means to "cover over." Jesus didn't merely cover over sin. It can mean "pacify," and that's not all that Christ did, either. The word "atonement" won't be found in the NT at all. Where our English translations use the word, the Greek term is "hilasmos," which is better translated "propitiation," which means to appease. Jesus did appease God but, again, that word does not do justice (no pun intended) to the whole work of Christ on Calvary.

Just a couple of things to consider.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

What's up with Calvin? Do you have a reason to bring him up? I know a lot of people who are obsessed with the guy, I hope you are not one.

Do you realize how synergists kept a lot of Rome?

PSA came from him

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

This doctrine of PSA - Penal substitutionary atonement, I believe is an essential doctrine to Christianity. I believe firmly this is a doctrine taught throughout scripture. I am also aware there are those out there who do agree with some aspects of PSA, mainly, they disagree that Jesus endured the wrath of the Father. If one loses this truth, you lose the gospel.

I believe these couple of verses may be a good place to start.
Psalm 22:1
My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?
Far from my help are the words of my groaning.

Matthew 26:39,
And He went a little beyond them, and fell on His face and prayed, saying, “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; yet not as I will, but as You will.”

Where does scripture imply it’s essential ? And are you claiming anyone who believes the other 6 theories are not saved ?

 

[Ceallaigh]

Indeed!

And you're a Calvinist, correct?

 

[Foghorn]

Where does scripture imply it’s essential ? And are you claiming anyone who believes the other 6 theories are not saved ?

I’ll continue tomorrow, need to hit the hay.
Thanks for contributing. And I’d appreciate if we stick to the topic. Asking if I believe someone is saved or not? What other theories. Be specific if you want an answer to that. Good grief.

 

[Foghorn]

And you're a Calvinist, correct?

Just ordinary Christian’s. Do you not think Calvinist are Christian’s?

 

[Ceallaigh]

Because the doctrine wasn't called PSA until later, many believe it is unbiblical. That's just a cheap cop-out and denial of the truth. The early church fathers wrote a lot about this, they named it something different and discussed parts of it. If anyone would like, I can search and post some.

I'd love to see you post early church fathers actually teaching penal substitutionary atonement. Not in the form of cherry picked single sentences that sounds like it, but an obvious clear teaching of it.

 

[Ceallaigh]

PSA came from him

Actually It began with Luther and then continued to develop within Calvinist tradition.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Just ordinary Christian’s. Do you not think Calvinist are Christian’s?

They're Christians who adhere to Calvinist doctrine. I'm not saying there's necessarily anything wrong with that. Just that someone who's a Calvinist is going to see scripture though a Calvinist lense. Just like Pentecostals are going to view scripture though the lense of Pentecostalism. I don't see why people should have trouble saying "I interpret scripture that way because I'm a Calvinist and that's what Calvinism teaches". PSA isn't so much an essential Christian doctrine, as it's an essential Calvinist doctrine. Just like speaking in tongues is an essential Pentecostal doctrine. I'd say truly essential Christian doctrine is doctrine that is held by most/all of Christianity.

 

[ladodgers6]

I am not in favor of starting with Psalm 22:1. Verse 14 would be better. However, I suggest Isaiah 53:10 is better than either.

But the LORD was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief; If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand.

The LORD crushed the Lord. The Lord endured his Father's crushing. God put him to grief. His soul was placed as an offering and specifically an offering for sin. The one who knew no sin was made sin, and made sin for us, and made sin for us that we might become God's righteousness (2 Cor. 5:21). Christ suffered, and suffered as the just for unjust, and the just suffered for the unjust to bring us close to God (1 Pet. 3:18). The one who was closest to God died to bring us close.

But let's not just skim over them. Let's examine these passages and flesh it out, more detail. How could one who knew no sin, made sin for us? This is where we should start. How can Christ be punished for sins he did not commit? People who do not hold the Imputation doctrine will have issues here. I will pointed out as we move along. How Christ is made to be sin, is that our sins are imputed to Christ's body; he bore our sins in his body; our sins are transferred to Christ; reckoned to Christ; credited to Christ. In other words, they become his sins to bear for us. He receive the due justice and pays the penalty for our sins. For example but not limited to are the following that he endured for his people: Crushing, afflicted, stricken, pierced, oppressed, despised and rejected, smitten, slaughtered, grieved, poured out his soul to death.


This is the only way God could redeem us from from our iniquity, and the punishment that follows it. But these strips that Christ took upon his body for our sins, is only dealing with our sinful condition before a Holy God. We still need to be righteous to enter heaven. And that's the where the marvel exchange comes into play. Our sins are placed on Christ where he stands in our place to receive the full wrath of God upon his head for us. And his righteousness is imputed to us through Faith Alone apart from works. We are clothed in the white robe of Christ's righteousness (Isa. 61:10). Now, being imputed or credited with the righteousness of Christ, I may enter heaven, by being declared righteous by God because of Christ, and this is received through Faith Alone. As Paul says in Romans 4:5 And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness.
​

The Righteous Shall Live by Faith​

Galatians 3:10 For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.” 11 Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for “The righteous shall live by faith.” 12 But the law is not of faith, rather “The one who does them shall live by them.” 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 hanged on a tree”— 14 so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.​

These are some of the places I would begin.


I also have two other thoughts. 1) PSA is a man-made doctrine. It's a good doctrine but it's not the only perspective on the matter and rather than think of the diversity as either/or or specific points all necessary in direct opposition to one another try thinking about the overlapping or shared terrain. They are not all wholly mutually exclusive of one another, and 2) they all occur in the context of the fact the word "atonement" as we think of it in modern vernacular is not what the scriptures actually use. The Hebrew word, "kaphar" simply means to "cover over." Jesus didn't merely cover over sin. It can mean "pacify," and that's not all that Christ did, either. The word "atonement" won't be found in the NT at all. Where our English translations use the word, the Greek term is "hilasmos," which is better translated "propitiation," which means to appease. Jesus did appease God but, again, that word does not do justice (no pun intended) to the whole work of Christ on Calvary.

Just a couple of things to consider.

I disagree with you that PSA is a man-made doctrine. It's a Biblical teaching that Christ propitiated God's wrath against us to himself. He bore our sins in our place. In other words, we switch places with Christ. Without this taking place, there is no redemption. Only condemnation, perdition, and punishment. In the Reformed Faith we call this the Marvelous exchange. Where God is both the just and the justifier of the ungodly!

Know what you believe and why you believe it.​

 

[ladodgers6]

They're Christians who adhere to Calvinist doctrine. I'm not saying there's necessarily anything wrong with that. Just that someone who's a Calvinist is going to see scripture though a Calvinist lense. Just like Pentecostals are going to view scripture though the lense of Pentecostalism. I don't see why people should have trouble saying "I interpret scripture that way because I'm a Calvinist and that's what Calvinism teaches". PSA isn't so much an essential Christian doctrine, as it's an essential Calvinist doctrine. Just like speaking in tongues is an essential Pentecostal doctrine. I'd say truly essential Christian doctrine is doctrine that is held by most/all of Christianity.

PSA is an essential doctrine for everyone, not just the ugly Calvinist. But I am curious, please give me your thoughts on Isaiah 53. And please be detailed as possible, thanks.

 

[Ceallaigh]

PSA is an essential doctrine for everyone, not just the ugly Calvinist.

You're badly misrepresenting me there. I've been listening to hyper-Calvinist John MacArthur for over 50 years. I currently listen to his Grace To You radio broadcast while driving to work. And I've attended Calvinist churches throughout my life. Starting with Grace Community Church pastored by MacArthur. So, no, I do not see Calvinist as ugly.

But I am curious, please give me your thoughts on Isaiah 53. And please be detailed as possible, thanks.

I take it you're referring more specifically to Isaiah 53:4-5

4 Surely he took up our pain
and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God,
stricken by him, and afflicted.

5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
and by his wounds we are healed.

What I'm noticing are the words "yet" and especially "but". "But" is used to introduce a phrase or clause contrasting with what has already been mentioned.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

PSA is an essential doctrine for everyone, not just the ugly Calvinist. But I am curious, please give me your thoughts on Isaiah 53. And please be detailed as possible, thanks.

It is a non essential reformed doctrine.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

You're badly misrepresenting me there. I've been listening to hyper-Calvinist John MacArthur for over 50 years. I currently listen to his Grace To You radio broadcast while driving to work. And I've attended Calvinist churches throughout my life. Starting with Grace Community Church pastored by MacArthur. So, no, I do not see Calvinist as ugly.


I take it you're referring more specifically to Isaiah 53:4-5

4 Surely he took up our pain
and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God,
stricken by him, and afflicted.

5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
and by his wounds we are healed.

What I'm noticing are the words "yet" and especially "but". "But" is used to introduce a phrase or clause contrasting with what has already been mentioned.

Much like you I was under Macs ministry for the past 40 plus years. I have most all his books and commentaries. You will get misrepresented by many calvinists when you are arguing against their doctrines.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

They're Christians who adhere to Calvinist doctrine. I'm not saying there's necessarily anything wrong with that. Just that someone who's a Calvinist is going to see scripture though a Calvinist lense. Just like Pentecostals are going to view scripture though the lense of Pentecostalism. I don't see why people should have trouble saying "I interpret scripture that way because I'm a Calvinist and that's what Calvinism teaches". PSA isn't so much an essential Christian doctrine, as it's an essential Calvinist doctrine. Just like speaking in tongues is an essential Pentecostal doctrine. I'd say truly essential Christian doctrine is doctrine that is held by most/all of Christianity.

Spot on with the calvinist lens. Most cannot see it any other way. Everything is filtered through tulip and like we are seeing here a non essential like PSA.

I left Calvinism recently through studying PSA as the vehicle which caused me to question many other teachings within calvinism.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

I'd love to see you post early church fathers actually teaching penal substitutionary atonement. Not in the form of cherry picked single sentences that sounds like it, but an obvious clear teaching of it.

As you well know thats an impossibility since no one in the early church believed in PSA.

 

[Ceallaigh]

Spot on with the calvinist lens. Most cannot see it any other way. Everything is filtered through tulip and like we are seeing here a non essential like PSA.

I left Calvinism recently through studying PSA as the vehicle which caused me to question many other teachings within calvinism.

Growing up the family church was Grace. But I didn't know what calvinist or reformed was as a kid. However after I spent a summer with out of state relatives who were Pentecostal and attending their church, I became much more aware of the differences in what different denominations teach when it comes to their pet doctrines. So I never became a Calvinist or a Pentecostal or a whatever else. I'm just an ordinary Christian.