Penal Atonement - Baby or Bathwater?

Elin · Feb 17, 2013

Because substitutionary penal atonement is misunderstood by some to clearly imply a license to sin,
they conclude from their misunderstanding that penal atonement is contra-Biblical.

So they seek to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

However, it is not penal atonement that is contra-Biblical, but their misunderstanding of its meaning.

The meaning of all atonment is found in the OT sacrificial regulations of Leviticus.

And the particular sacrifice which shows the meaning of Christ's atonement is the sin offering of Lev 4.

So following are brief comments on relevant verses from (chapters) Lev 4, 5, 6, and Nu 15, 28 on the sin offering.

It is there that we learn sacrificial atonement is penal.
The whole chapter is presented so that the context may be examined.

LEV 4 - Sin Offering

mandatory for specific unintentional sin, as well as for
confession of sin, forgiveness of sin and cleansing from defilement of sin
priest and community offering differed from leader and member (most holy) offering
blood applied to different altars; sacrifices consumed differently
most holy, whoever touches will become holy (6:17-18) - see 2:3
animal must be without defect (no stunted, deformed or blind, injured, maimed, diseased, or cut), because offering is mandatory (22:22-24)

In the mandatory sin offering can be seen a pattern of Christ, the perfect, sinless one sacrifice for sin (Jn 8:46; Heb 9:28).

v. 3 - The sin of the priest brought guilt on the people

their spiritual well-being depended on the faithfulness of their High Priest
the spiritual well-being of those who believe in Jesus Christ depends on the faithfulness of their High Priest, Jesus Christ (Heb 4:14--5:10)

NT Parallels: seen in the regulations

vv. 6, 16-17 - blood of the sin offering for priests or community taken into the Holy Place and sprinkled seven times before the shielding curtain

complete and perfect atonement of the blood of Christ
Christ's blood was taken into the Most Holy Place when he ascended into heaven (Heb 9:11-12)

vv. 7, 18 - blood applied to gold altar of incense with finger

Holy Spirit is called the finger of God (Lk 11:2, see parallel Mt 12:28), who applies the blood of Christ to our sin through faith
incense burning on altar can represent prayer ascending to God (Rev 5:8, 8:3-4)
our prayer must be cleansed by the blood of Christ,
because even the prayer and praises of a sinful people (1Jn 1:8-10) are defiled (Ex 28:38; Is 64:6)

BIBLICAL PRINCIPLE:
The only basis for prayer is the shed blood of Christ.

vv. 7, 18 - remainder of blood poured out at base of brazen altar

Christ was sacrificed on the altar of the cross, where his blood was poured out at its base (Jn 19:34, 37)

vv. 7-10, 19-20 - inner kidneys and fat burned on altar

our inner part, the heart, given to God

vv. 12, 21 - the rest of the sacrificial animal is burned outside the camp on the ceremonially clean ash heap of the burnt offerings (Lev 6:11)

fire consumed the sacrifice
outside the camp where their sin had been put away, never to rise up in judgment against them
Christ was crucified outside Jerusalem (Heb 13:10-11)

6:30 - sin offering whose blood is taken into the Holy Place could not be eaten, must be totally burned on the altar

The sacrifices only covered sin (Ro 4:7; Ps 85:2), they did not remit (take away) sin (Heb 10:4, 11), so
because the blood of the true sacrifice (Christ) was not yet taken into the true (heavenly) sanctuary (Heb 9:12, 10:24) to purchase forgiveness (remittance) of sin (i.e., salvation), the sinner could not yet participate (1Co 10:16), through eating of the sacrifice, in the benefits of remission (but only the benefits of covering)

BIBLICAL PRINCIPLE:
The OT priest could not eat the flesh of the altar if the blood was taken into the Holy Place,
but the NT priest (believer - 1Pe 2:5) can eat the flesh of the altar (Lord's Supper) because the blood (of Christ) has been taken into the Most Holy Place (heaven).

vv. 25, 30 - blood of sin offering for leader or member applied to horns of brazen altar

to remove guilt, and poured out at base of altar
if they did not forsake their sin, the blood of the sin offering applied to the horns of the brazen altar
remained as a witness against them (Jer 17:1)

v. 26 - fat only is burned on the altar, flesh is consumed by priests (6:26)

received sin of people into themselves (fed on them) - 10:17
Christ our priest and sin-bearer received our sin (2Co 5:21; 1Pe 2:24)

v. 31 - sin offering is an aroma pleasing to the Lord

the atoning work of Chrst is a delight to the Lord

Lev 6:27 - any blood-spattered garment must be washed in a holy place

NT parallel - Heb 10:29: the blood of Christ must not be treated as an unholy thing

6:25-28 - the sin sacrifice was both most holy and defiled

the most holy Christ, our sin sacrifice, was defiled by our sin which he bore (1Pe 2:24)

4:13-14 - sin sacrifice was for unintentional sin only (sins of the faithful) - Lev 4:2, 13-14, 22, 27

failed to speak up when he hears a public charge to testify
touched anything ceremonially unclean
touched human uncleanness
thoughtlessly took an oath (5:1-5)

BIBLICAL PRINCIPLE:
Ignorance does not excuse from responsibility and guilt of sin (Lev 5:17, 4:13-14).

Nu 15:30 - no sacrifice for intentional (high-handed, defiant, rebellious) sin

the sinner is held responsible, he must bear his own guilt, because there is no sacrifice to bear it for him, he dies in his guilt, with his sin unforgiven (Lev 19:8, 20:17, 24:15-16, 7:18, 20, 25, 17:16)
points to sin of unbelief/rebellion (Heb 10:26-27; Jn 3:18)
note the exacting justice of God (Mt 5:25-26, 18:32-35)

BIBLICAL PRINCIPLE:
How do we satisfy the exacting justice of God? . .Jesus has done it for those who believe in him (Jn 3:18).

Nu 28:3 - sacrificial animal must be without defect, because sacrifice was mandatory

our sin sacrifice, Jesus Christ, was without defect, pure, perfect, sinless (Jn 8:46; 2Co 5:21; Heb 4:15, 7:26; 1Pe 2:22)

Lev 5:1-5 - confession of sin must be specific

BIBLICAL PRINCIPLE: Our confession of sin should be specific, to show
realization of our sin
awareness of God's holiness
willingness to turn from (repent of) the sin

5:6-7 - sacrifices were penalty for sin (Lev 5:14, 6:6, 21:41, 43 - Jesus died as penalty for sin (Ro 3:25)

God's response to sin is punitive (Lk 12:47-48; Ro 2:8)
principle of penal atonement

5:11 - no oil or incense on grain offering for atonement of sin

must not be pleasing to the taste (oil) or smell (incense), as sin is not pleasing to God

5:12 - grain offering for atonement of sin burned on top of animal (blood) sacrifices

"Without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin." (Heb 9:22)
the blood sacrifice was the base (basis) of atonement in the grain sin offering

SUMMARY - Lev 4

The sin offering shows us something about:

1. nature of Christ - both holy and defiled, as the sin sacrifice, and the altar (chp 1)

2. work of Christ

as priest, would offer himself as a substitutionary sin sacrifice to pay the penalty for sin - as the priest offered the substitutionary sin sacrifice to pay the penalty for sin
outside Jerusalem - as the sin sacrifice was burned outside Jerusalem
where his blood would be poured out at the foot of the cross - as the blood was poured out at the base of the brazen altar
making complete atonement - as the blood sprinkled seven times before the shielding curtain to make atonement

3. holiness:

prayer must be cleansed by the blood of Christ to be acceptable to God - as the gold altar of incense (prayer ascending to God) had to be cleansed by the blood
the blood of Christ removes the guilt of the believer, but judges the guilt of the unbeliever - as the blood applied to the horns of the brazen altar removed the guilt of the repentant, but increased the guilt of the unrepentant

So penal atonement is Biblical.

What is not Biblical is that it clearly implies a licencse to sin.
God never provides a license to sin.

What is contra-Biblical is the ridiculous notion that God's provision of substitutionary penal atonement in the sacrifice of his Son (Ro 3:25) is a license to sin.

Tommy4Christ · Feb 17, 2013

I see the ransom model being taught in scripture, you included many good verses, not sure if you can see that IF God poured out His wrath on Jesus for us, and Jesus took our place, or was out substitute, then all sin is pre forgiven.
Then falling into wilful rebellion to God is covered by this substitute.

The wrath of God is against the children of disobedience.
Thus real biblical repentance in thrown out with the bath water.

An offering or substitute!

Isa 53:10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
The death of Christ is not something you want to get wrong, but there are many false teachings on this today, teaching Jesus became sin on the cross, thus God poured out His wrath on Him, as He became sin and suffered our deserved punishment, often called penal substitution.
Jesus was clearly a sin offering, used many times in the book of Isaiah, as He was sinless, and spotless without blemish, offered up as an offering for the forgiveness of all our past sins!
Rom 3:25 whom God has set forth to be a propitiation( an atoning victim) through faith in His blood, to declare His righteousness through the passing by of the sins that had taken place before, in the forbearance of God;
Jesus could not have been our substitute and a sin offering at the same time, it’s either one or the other, one declares us righteous while we are still sinners, and the other offers the sinner a choice, which is to repent, as Jesus commanded to all, Luke 13-3, where we become the living sacrifice, by touching His blood as stated in Romans Ch 12. As this living sacrifice we then walk the crucified life, Gal 2-20, obeying God from the heart, and abstaining from the indulgences of this world. 1 John 2-15-17!
Rom 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God to present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, pleasing to God, which is your reasonable service.
Rom 12:2 And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, in order to prove by you what is that good and pleasing and perfect will of God.
We then become the living sacrifice as we die with Him in repentance, and now walk in newness of life, cleansed and purged from all sin and defilement.
Heb 9:14 how much more shall the blood of Christ (who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God) purge your conscience (SIN) from dead works to serve the living God?
If you believe you come into the kingdom, through the Billy Graham, repeat after me sinners prayer, then just receive the package deal that says Jesus took your place, is your righteousness and substitute, you do nothing such as repent first, and I mean repentance on the scale of Nineveh, then please check out what the early saints taught about the atonement.
Jesus was a one-time sin offering, and He came to ransom all mankind from the corrupting influence of sin! He died on our behalf, not in our place!
Mar 10:45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many.
He came with a purpose, and that was not to save the lost world IN their sins, Joh 1:29 The next day John sees Jesus coming to him and says, Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! But out of them, to take them away by opening their eyes,
Act 26:18 in order to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness (repent) to light and from the authority of Satan to God, so that they may receive remission (forgiveness) of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me.
The whole purpose of the atonement wasn’t to provide a covering for ongoing sin and disobedience, but a plan set forth by God, for mankind to reconcile himself to God, 2Co 5:20 Therefore, we are the Messiah's representatives, as though God were pleading through us. We plead on the Messiah's behalf: "Be reconciled to God! Touching the blood of Christ, brought through His ability and great need to repent and stop sinning, as commanded by God!
1Jn 5:18 We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.
Now as we walk in newness of life, which is the crucified life, free from the bondages of sin, that can only come through the clearing of repentance, guarding our heart from sin and temptation, set free in reality not some fake provision or substitute that never occurred. So you can see Jesus never became sin, He came to destroy its influence on us, as we come to the mercy seat, through brokenness brought on through repentance!
1Jn 3:8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, (appeared) that he might destroy the works of the devil.
1Jn 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
So if you are still in bondage to sin, and worldliness, and think Jesus did it all for you in the sense He took your place (substituted His righteousness for yours) then you have a big problem with what the word of God clearly teaches on the death of Christ!
Tit 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
Tit 2:14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
He came to redeem us from sin, not cover us IN them, and to purify unto Himself a remnant of devout followers, hungering and thirsting for righteousness, separated from a dark and perverse world, that is void of truth and heading for destruction!
Tommy
PS. When the word talks about sin, there must be a distinction (separation) of sins that lead to death, and those that do not! Galatians 5-19-21, 1 Cor 6-9-10, Rev 22-15, lists some sins that if not completely repented of lead to spiritual death! Plus many more severe warnings, that is that willful, deliberate, presumptuous sins against God, leads to death! Other mistakes, poor judgments, faults, misplaced zeal, etc., have no bearing on sins that lead to death, unless they work into guile, hate, envy, lust, and pride etc. There must be a balance between willful deliberate(pre-planned) sin, and all our daily faults, struggles and mistakes, that are not sins that lead to death, but also must be kept in check, so they DO NOT lead us into temptation, where the will gives in, is drawn away and enticed, which then gives birth to sin and death!
It’s a process, you don’t walk along and fall into fornication, or drunkenness, or get so upset or angry, that eventually leads to violence and profanity, unless you believe all sin is the same, thus making those who claim to do what is right before God a liar, self-righteous and being dishonest!
All the vile sins must have been crucified with Christ, through repentance, or else the old man is still alive and well, maybe subdued for a time as you change some things in your life, but if you are still struggling with these sins, and consider them a normal practice in the life of a Christian, then you must go and do your first works , Rev 2-5, crucify your flesh with Christ, Gal 2-20, and walk a life pleasing to God, by a heart made pure by obeying His word, through the power of His spirit, now dwelling in a cleansed and purged vessel, ready to receive His implanted word(truth) with great meekness and humility, that comes only through a truly broken and repentant heart!

Elin · Feb 17, 2013

Tommy4Christ said:

In addition to the sin offering of Lev 4, penal atonement is also taught in Scripture in Ro 3:25-26.

The wrath of God is the justice of God.

Ro 3:25-26 - "God presented Jesus as a sacrifice of propitiation through faith in his blood.

He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had passed over

(left unpunished) the sins committed beforehand (OT)--he did it to demonstrate his justice

at the present time,so as to be just and the one who justifies."

1) What "passed over" the sins committed beforehand (OT)?

2) The "what passed over" consisted precisely of?

3) How did the "what passed over" demonstrate God's justice?

4) For what did Jesus' sacrificial death atone?

5) How does Jesus' sacrificial death atone (make reparation, amends) for it?

6) What is the connection between his atonement and my faith in it (his blood)?

Present a consistent and Biblical explanation of the questions above, and you will see

the penal atonement presented in the NT, based on the penal atonement of the sin offering in the OT.

The answers to the questions above will illuminate Biblical penal atonement in Ro 3:25-26.

Your thinking is not Biblical because it is upside down.

You base God's word on your human reasoning, rather than basing your human reasoning on God's word.

God's word presents penal atonement in both the sin offering of the OT, and in Ro 3:25-26 of the NT.

Since God never presents a license to sin, your human reasoning regarding penal atonement is in error.

Abiding · Feb 17, 2013

good thing i dont watch sports since i didnt
know sports idolator was added to the big list.

zone · Feb 17, 2013

Tommy4Christ said:

see:

http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/58065-penal-atonement-baby-bathwater.html < click

#1

zone · Feb 17, 2013

Skinski?
Skinski?

meet Elin

Elin · Feb 17, 2013

Tommy4Christ said:

Nor do you understand the word of God regarding substitionary atonement, likewise presented in the OT sacrificial system in Lev 1, as well as in Gal 3:13 and 2Co 5:14, 18-21.

Gal 3:13 - "Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law." How?
By "being made a curse for us."
He bore the curse (punishment) of the law which was directed against our sin, so that we might not have to bear it.
That is substitutionary atonement.

2Co 5:14, 18-21 - "One died for all. . .God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that we might become the righteousness of God" (as presented in Ro 1:17, 3:21, 22, 5:17, Php 3:9).
That is substitutionary atonement.

And also presented below are brief comments on the relevant verses of Lev 1.
Again, the whole chapter is included so that the context may be examined.

Lev 1 - Whole Burnt (Holocaust) Offering - Lev 1

voluntary act of devotion and total consecration, not required to atone for sin
always with grain and drink offerings
offered every morning & evening by High Priest for people, burned continually on the altar
could use deformed or stunted animal because it was voluntary (free-will) offering, but no other defects (blind, injured, maimed, diseased or cut - 22:22-24)

Picture of Christ, who was totally dedicated to God, and who voluntarily offered himself as a sacrifice (Jn 10:18).

The sacrificial system reveals the nature and work of Christ, therefore, the regulations are very specific so they will be an accurate revelation of the reality in Christ.

Sequence and Purpose of Sacrifices:

sin, guilt - to make atonement, which is necessary for the sinner to be accepted by God
burnt, grain - obedience, submission, dedication and consecration to God
fellowship (peace) - fellowship with God and priest (in communal meal) who offered it

PERSONAL APPLICATION: In the purposes of the various sacrifices can be seen the elements of holiness

confession
repentance
submission
obedience
dedication
fellowship with God

The five steps of a sacrifice present many patterns which can be seen regarding the sacrifice of Christ:

v. 3 - presentation of sacrifice at door to be examined by the priest

Christ presented himself for sacrifice - entry into Jerusalem (Lk 9:51)
examination by the priests - Jn 18:12-13, 19-24; Mt 26: 57-65, 21:23-27

v. 4,24,29,33 - laying on of hands, confessing the sin

sin transferred to, laid on animal which died in sinner's place
principle of substitionary atonement

v. 5 - animal slayed by sinner on north side of altar - Christ died north of the city

to show personal responsibility for its death due to his sin
to show sinner's judgment of his own sin (1Co 11:31) by its death
to show agreement with righteous judgment of God on sin; i.e., death (Ro 6:25)

PERSONAL APPLICATION: As the sinner slayed the animal in judgment of sin and then cut it up, so we are to judge our own sin (1Co 11:31) and cut if off.

BIBLICAL PRINCIPLE: We must deal radically with our sin (Mk 9:43-48)

v. 5- blood applied to all sides of brazen altar for cleansing (which was defiled by sin laid on it), or to horns of gold altar

Christ's blood cleanses all sin - 1Jn 1:7
blood of Christ is applied in the NT by faith, trusting in the work of Christ on the cross (Ro 3:25)

v. 8-10 - sacrifice consumed, by total burning, or burning part of sacrifice and remainder eaten by priests

priests removed guilt from the people by taking it within themselves (10:17)
total burning was total consecration

BIBLICAL PRINCIPLE: As the burnt offering was totally consumed on the altar, so we are to offer our bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God, for this is the reasonable way to worship God (in view of what Christ did for us) - Ro 12:1.

PERSONAL APPLICATION: We are to love God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength. This is the greatest commandment (Mk 12:28-30).

NT Parallels: in sacrificial regulations of Chp 1.
v. 5 - altar - pattern of Christ

sinless, holy - altar is holy, sanctifies the gifts (Mt 23:19; Ex 29:37), as Christ sanctifies us
sin-bearer, defiled - sin-bearing altar is defiled and must be cleansed by blood of the sacrifice, as our sin/defilement must be cleansed by the blood of Christ

v. 9 - aroma pleasing to God - because it is an act of total consecration by the offerer

6:9, 12 - continually burned on altar, fire never to go out because the fire came directly from the Lord (9:24)

showed God's continual acceptance of the sacrifices

6:10 - priest - pattern of Christ

white linen clothes (Ex 28:39, 42-43) - symbolizes righteousness (purity) of Christ
ashes - symbol of sacrificed body of Christ

6:11 - placed in clean place - sacrificed body of Christ placed in undefiled tomb (Jn 19:41)

6:10 - on east side of altar (6:10) - points to Chris

Morning Star (sun) - 2Pe 1:19; Rev 22:16
his star in the east - Mt 2:2
Star of Jacob - Nu 24:17
see Ex 27:13; Nu 2:3, 3:28; 2Sa 23:4; S of S 6:10; Eze 10:19, 11:23, 43:1-4, 17, 44:1-3; Mal 4:2; Mt 24:7; Lk 1:78; Rev 2:28, 7:2

7:8 - skin given to priest to clothe himself, as sign of reconciliation through the sacrifice

in the garden, the sacrificial animal was stripped of its skin and given to man to clothe himself, as a sign of reconciliation through the sacrifice
picture of Christ - as the animal was stripped of its skin so that man (priest) might be clothed in it, so Christ (the sacrifice) was stripped of his righteousness and made sin for us, that we might be clothed in his righteousness (2Co 5;21) and acceptable to a holy God

Nu 15:5, 7 - always accompanied by drink and grain offerings

flesh and bread must go together (Jn 6:51)
bread and wine were also sacrifices (offerings - Lev 5:11; Nu 15:4, 10, 28:7), prefiguring Christ (Lk 22:19-20)

Nu 28:7 - strong wine - power of the blood of Christ to cleanse all sin (1Jn 1:7)

Nu 28:7 - wine poured out - Christ's blood was poured out in sacrifice (Mt 26:28)

drink offering poured out represents death (2Tim 4:6; Php 2:7)

SUMMARY - Lev 1

The whole burnt (holocaust) offering shows us something about:

1. nature of Christ:

both holy and defiled, as the altar

2. work of Christ:

sin bearer who died in the sinner's place - as did the animal who bore the sin and died in the sinner's place
fragrant offereing pleasing to God - as he aroma of the sacrifices
sacrificed body placed in an undefiled tomb - as ashes placed in a clean place
would give his body as a sacrifice on the cross - as the bread was sacrificed on the altar (Nu 15:4)
his blood would be poured out on the cross in sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin - as the wine offering was poured out in sacrifice (Nu 28:7)

3. nature of holiness: - as the Israelite slayed the animal in judgment of his own sin, and then cut it up,
so we are to judge our own sin and cut if off.

We must deal radically with our sin (Mk 9:43-48). "If your hand, foot cause you to sin, cut them off, and if your eye, pluck it out."

God's word presents substitionary atonement in both the holocaust offering of the OT, and in Gal 3:13; 2Co 5:14, 18-21 of the NT.

Again, your upside-down thinking is contra-Biblical.

zone · Feb 17, 2013

because my sister Elin loves LOGOS

jimmydiggs · Feb 17, 2013

zone said:

Better yet, it doens't appear to be copy-pasta.

jimmydiggs · Feb 17, 2013

zone said:

I read that in the "recent posts" section as "elin loves legos". Freud?

zone · Feb 17, 2013

jimmydiggs said:

Ariel82 · Feb 17, 2013

LEGOS!

jimmydiggs · Feb 17, 2013

This is for you Tommy, my love.

1 Derek Flood, ‘Substitutionary Atonement and the Church Fathers: A Reply to

the Authors of
Pierced for Our Transgressions’, Evangelical Quarterly, 82.2 (2010),

142-59, responding to Steve Jeffery, Mike Ovey, and Andrew Sach,
Pierced for Our

Transgressions: Rediscovering the Glory of Penal Substitution
(Nottingham: Inter-

Varsity Press, 2007), c. 5.

2 Flood, ‘Church Fathers’, 142.

EQ
83.3 (2011), 195–216

Penal substitutionary atonement in the

Church Fathers

Garry J. Williams

Dr Williams is Director of The John Owen Centre for Theological Study at London

Theological Seminary.

KEY WORDS: Athanasius, atonement, Augustine, Christus Victor, church fathers, Eusebius

of Caesarea, Gregory of Nazianzus, Justin Martyr, patristics, penal substitution,

salvation.

Introduction

Derek Flood has argued in the pages of this journal that the texts adduced in

Pierced for Our Transgressions
to prove that a number of the early church fathers

taught penal substitutionary atonement do nothing of the sort.
1 He maintains

that they do teach a substitutionary atonement, but not a penal substitutionary

atonement. Rather, he insists, ‘the dominant pattern found in these patristic

writers is substitutionary atonement understood within the conceptual framework

of restorative justice.’
2 Flood notes that the evidence contained in Pierced

for Our Transgressions
is taken from my own doctoral dissertation. I trust that

this renders it appropriate for me to offer a reply to Flood’s case, though it is

unfortunate that he in his article does not engage directly with my own material,

especially since I was able to devote more space to close exegesis of the

patristic texts than was available to the authors of
Pierced for Our Transgressions.

My aim here is to show by still closer exegesis that the passages in question do

teach penal substitutionary atonement. I say ‘closer’ because the constraints of

space still restrict the level of attention that can be given here to the passages. In

due course I hope to publish a full-length treatment of the patristic evidence for

penal substitutionary atonement that will offer more sustained exegesis of these

passages and of a considerable number of further examples. The remarks here

are limited to addressing the particular objections raised by Flood.

Definition

My doctorate employed the following definition as a touchstone to assay the

patristic evidence for penal substitutionary atonement: ‘
An author can be held

196 • EQ
Garry J. Williams

to teach the Penal doctrine if he plainly states that the punishment deserved by

sin from God was borne by Jesus Christ in his death on the Cross
.’3 Flood believes

that this definition is too broad because it does not specify ‘the working mechanism

of the atonement’. In other words, ‘only when the purpose of substitution

is the
satisfaction of God’s retributive justice via penalty can an author be said to

endorse penal substitution as it is understood in Reformed theology’.
4 While the

word ‘retribution’ is indeed not used in my definition, the idea is clearly implied

by the words ‘
the punishment deserved by sin from God’. It is a commonplace in

the definition of retribution that its distinctive feature is the element of desert.

For example, the philosopher Ted Honderich describes retributive theory in

its Kantian form thus: ‘A man
must be punished if he has performed an act for

which he deserves a penalty.’
5 My definition does therefore specify this key element

of desert, and, unlike a secular theory of retribution, it finds the basis of

that desert in the attitude of God himself to sin.

Flood also thinks that the idea of satisfaction must be present. If this is intended

as a verbal requirement then it over-specifies the definition. To require

a verbal reference to satisfaction would be to impose an anachronistic expectation

on earlier writers of some later ideal type of doctrinal expression. However,

Flood probably means that the idea implicit in satisfaction must be present, in

which case a minor addition to the definition would suffice. The root idea of

satisfaction is the sufficiency of Christ’s suffering to deal with God’s retributive

response to sin, as even the etymology suggests:
satis facere. If a writer teaches

that Christ effectively dealt with the penalty of sin deserved from God when he

died bearing it, then he is teaching that his death made satisfaction. The actual

terms used might be many: dealt with, paid, sufficed for, bore away, discharged,

fulfilled, and so on. If a writer teaches that Christ bore the penalty deserved by

sin from God and that this action was enough to deal with the penal aspects of

sin, then he is teaching satisfaction. If we think that this element needs to be

made more explicit in my definition, then it could be revised thus:
An author

can be held to teach the Penal doctrine if he plainly states that the punishment

deserved by sin from God was borne and dealt with by Jesus Christ in his death

on the cross
. This additional requirement is easily met by all of the authors discussed,

since they all affirm the efficacy of Christ’s substitutionary bearing of

God’s penal response to sin.

Justin Martyr

We turn now to the specific examples. A refrain of Flood’s article is that the authors

of
Pierced for Our Transgressions move too hastily from quoting a passage

3 ‘A Critical Exposition of Hugo Grotius’s Doctrine of the Atonement in
De satisfactione

Christi
’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Oxford, 1999), 70.

4 Flood, ‘Church Fathers’, 143.

5 Ted Honderich,
Punishment: The Supposed Justifications, 2nd edn (Harmondsworth:

Penguin Books, 1976), 24.

Penal substitutionary atonement in the Church Fathers
EQ • 197

to concluding that it teaches penal substitutionary atonement. This criticism

begins in his comments on Justin Martyr: ‘From this single quote they pronounce…’.

6
Despite the critical tone of this comment and his own right plea for

a sustained treatment of context, Flood himself argues from just one statement

in the
Dialogue with Trypho and a single sentence from Justin’s Second Apology.

Here is the disputed passage from the
Dialogue:

Then Trypho remarked, ‘Be assured that all our nation waits for Christ; and

we admit that all the Scriptures which you have quoted refer to Him. Moreover,

I do also admit that the name of Jesus, by which the son of Nave (Nun)

was called, has inclined me very strongly to adopt this view. But whether

Christ should be so shamefully crucified, this we are in doubt about. For

whosoever is crucified is said in the law to be accursed (
e0pikata/ratov ga\r

o9 staurou/menov e0n tw|~ no/mw|
), so that I am exceedingly incredulous on this

point.
7

Justin answers Trypho’s appeal to Deuteronomy 21:23 thus:

Just as God commanded the sign to be made by the brazen serpent, and

yet He is blameless; even so, though a curse lies in the law against persons

who are crucified, yet no curse lies on the Christ of God (
ou0k e1ti de\ kai\ kata\

tou= Xristou= tou= Qeou= kata/ra kei=tai
), by whom all that have committed

things worthy of a curse are saved.

For the whole human race will be found to be under a curse. For it is written

in the law of Moses, ‘Cursed is every one that continueth not in all

things that are written in the book of the law to do them.’ And no one has

accurately done all, nor will you venture to deny this; but some more and

some less than others have observed the ordinances enjoined. But if those

who are under this law appear to be under a curse for not having observed

zone · Feb 17, 2013

because my brother jimmy loves LOGOS

Search

Penal Atonement - Baby or Bathwater?

Elin

Banned

Tommy4Christ

Banned

Elin

Banned

Abiding

Guest

zone

Senior Member

zone

Senior Member

Elin

Banned

zone

Senior Member

jimmydiggs

Guest

jimmydiggs

Guest

zone

Senior Member

Ariel82

Guest

jimmydiggs

Guest

zone

Senior Member