Penal Substitution is NOT a “Theory”

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

ForestGreenCook

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2018
3,128
358
83
Matthew 6:24 tells us no man can serve two masters, also we are known by our fruit, so if they are living a life that is not pleasing to God, I doubt they will enter the kingdom of God, unless they repent of course. The prodigal son returned to the Father, so there is always hope. :)
You are right about the prodigal son, he will always be his father's son and can repent of his disobedience. The natural man, before he has been born again, will not repent to breaking a spiritual law that he cannot discern because he thinks it is foolishness.
 

DB7

Junior Member
Dec 29, 2014
283
132
43
Romans 6:23
23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.


3408. misthos
Strong's Concordance​
misthos: wages, hire

Original Word: μισθός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: misthos
Phonetic Spelling: (mis-thos')
Definition: wages, hire
Usage: (a) pay, wages, salary, (b) reward, recompense, punishment.
Yes, OOH, that's true, but God was trying to spare us that penalty (eternal death), so that he came up with another means to do so. Don't forget, men still die, so Jesus did not really take our place then, did he?
We must get used to the way that the Bible speaks sometimes, if one would really pay attention, they would appreciate, for example, how the Bible very often uses hyperbole our very broad statements, when the meaning is actually something much less inclusive. But, more so in this case, one cannot be so literal because the logistics are clearly implausible. That's our clue.
 

OneOfHis

Well-known member
Mar 24, 2019
420
819
93
Yes, OOH, that's true, but God was trying to spare us that penalty (eternal death), so that he came up with another means to do so. Don't forget, men still die, so Jesus did not really take our place then, did he?
We must get used to the way that the Bible speaks sometimes, if one would really pay attention, they would appreciate, for example, how the Bible very often uses hyperbole our very broad statements, when the meaning is actually something much less inclusive. But, more so in this case, one cannot be so literal because the logistics are clearly implausible. That's our clue.
I disagree with your understanding.

We have indeed earned a just punishment. It is by grace through faith that the righteousness of Jesus is imputed to us, and our sin to Him....

No need to have some guru technically pick appart scriptures and use long winded lectures to try and share the simplicity of Christ which is so crystal clear a child can understand it.


We can definitely dive deep into many doctrines and it can even be fun and fruitful.... but as far as the gospel... the good news goes there is no need to split hairs and from what I've seen the OP did a fine job explaining that.
 

ForestGreenCook

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2018
3,128
358
83
I disagree with your understanding.

We have indeed earned a just punishment. It is by grace through faith that the righteousness of Jesus is imputed to us, and our sin to Him....

No need to have some guru technically pick appart scriptures and use long winded lectures to try and share the simplicity of Christ which is so crystal clear a child can understand it.


We can definitely dive deep into many doctrines and it can even be fun and fruitful.... but as far as the gospel... the good news goes there is no need to split hairs and from what I've seen the OP did a fine job explaining that.
My age is probably a factor to me in understanding modern tecknowledge but who is the OP and where do I find his explanation?
 

DB7

Junior Member
Dec 29, 2014
283
132
43
I disagree with your understanding.

We have indeed earned a just punishment. It is by grace through faith that the righteousness of Jesus is imputed to us, and our sin to Him....

No need to have some guru technically pick appart scriptures and use long winded lectures to try and share the simplicity of Christ which is so crystal clear a child can understand it.


We can definitely dive deep into many doctrines and it can even be fun and fruitful.... but as far as the gospel... the good news goes there is no need to split hairs and from what I've seen the OP did a fine job explaining that.
I just believes that scriptures requires more than just a superficial reading, meaning, more than just a face-value, or hyper-literal interpretation.
And again, the clue when and where to take scripture literally, is when the mechanics are just not feasible, as in Jesus dying or suffering eternally.
Thanks!
 

OneOfHis

Well-known member
Mar 24, 2019
420
819
93
My age is probably a factor to me in understanding modern tecknowledge but who is the OP and where do I find his explanation?
I think it means the original poster.( @Nehemiah6 ) I have seen it used before and shortened it to save time while typing.

I was mainly agreeing with the original post on page one and only skimmed until the message I responded to.
 

PS

Senior Member
Jan 11, 2013
4,676
584
113
I disagree with your understanding.

We have indeed earned a just punishment. It is by grace through faith that the righteousness of Jesus is imputed to us, and our sin to Him....

No need to have some guru technically pick appart scriptures and use long winded lectures to try and share the simplicity of Christ which is so crystal clear a child can understand it.


We can definitely dive deep into many doctrines and it can even be fun and fruitful.... but as far as the gospel... the good news goes there is no need to split hairs and from what I've seen the OP did a fine job explaining that.
Are you saying you have the righteousness of Jesus and are immortal?
 

PS

Senior Member
Jan 11, 2013
4,676
584
113
Well the bottom line is that there could be no forgiveness of sins until and unless all our sins had been atoned for. So it is not forgiveness vs justice, but forgiveness FOLLOWS justice........
So, because according to you, forgiveness FOLLOWS justice, you are saying that if my neighbour steals from me I cannot forgive him until I have been punished, and then I can forgive him?

That means I have to suffer twice, or even three times, first from the theft, and then I have to be punished for His wrong doing, and then I have to crawl back to him and forgive Him.

Isn't he the one who should suffer justice?
 

PS

Senior Member
Jan 11, 2013
4,676
584
113
Good post.

@Nehemiah6
You will find this very interesting.


You may not realize it but the penal model of redemption is opposed to the forgiveness model of redemption. Watch the video with the intent of simply understanding the alternate (original) argument for the atonement. It may change your view about this subject. It's profound.

Forgiveness vs. penal justice
That video is so deep.
 
Jul 18, 2017
9,606
3,254
113
So, because according to you, forgiveness FOLLOWS justice, you are saying that if my neighbour steals from me I cannot forgive him until I have been punished, and then I can forgive him?
We are not discussing you and your neighbour but Christ and the sin debt. Before God could offer grace and forgiveness to anyone, the sin debt had to be paid in full. And it was paid at the cross. Kindly read, study, and meditate on Isaiah 53.
 
Jul 8, 2018
3,128
358
83
We are not discussing you and your neighbour but Christ and the sin debt. Before God could offer grace and forgiveness to anyone, the sin debt had to be paid in full. And it was paid at the cross. Kindly read, study, and meditate on Isaiah 53.
The only offering that was made by Jesus on the cross was the sacrifice for the sins of those that God gave to him and the offering was to God for God's acceptance and not to man for man's acceptance. Jesus eternally saved all of those that he died for, saying "it is finished" There was no offering for man's acceptance. God looks upon all of those that Jesus died for as holy and without blame. Does God look upon all mankind as holy and without blame?
 
Nov 16, 2019
300
119
43
We are not discussing you and your neighbour but Christ and the sin debt. Before God could offer grace and forgiveness to anyone, the sin debt had to be paid in full. And it was paid at the cross. Kindly read, study, and meditate on Isaiah 53.
The problem with that is, if the debt gets paid then there is no need for the debt to be forgiven. Reference Matthew 18:21-34 with this in mind. The king forgave the debt. He did not pay it himself as if merely satisfying the legal obligation of the slave. No, he forgave it. If he had legally satisfied the debt not only would there be no debt to forgive, but no debt to reinstate, which the King did in the story. He wouldn't be able to do that if he had paid the legal obligation of the slave.
 
Jul 18, 2017
9,606
3,254
113
The king forgave the debt. He did not pay it himself as if merely satisfying the legal obligation of the slave.
There's no need to take a parable and build a doctrine out of it. We have the full doctrine of Penal Substitution and the finished work of Christ within the Bible. If you choose to disregard that and go off on tangents that's your problem.
 
Jul 8, 2018
3,128
358
83
The problem with that is, if the debt gets paid then there is no need for the debt to be forgiven. Reference Matthew 18:21-34 with this in mind. The king forgave the debt. He did not pay it himself as if merely satisfying the legal obligation of the slave. No, he forgave it. If he had legally satisfied the debt not only would there be no debt to forgive, but no debt to reinstate, which the King did in the story. He wouldn't be able to do that if he had paid the legal obligation of the slave.
Christ paid the legal price for the adoption of God's children on the cross and no sins that we commit in our lives will keep us out of heaven.
 

PS

Senior Member
Jan 11, 2013
4,676
584
113
We are not discussing you and your neighbour but Christ and the sin debt. Before God could offer grace and forgiveness to anyone, the sin debt had to be paid in full. And it was paid at the cross. Kindly read, study, and meditate on Isaiah 53.
I CAN forgive my neighbour. The alternative is that he ends up in jail (hell). Alternatively I can forgive AND wipe out the debt by going to hell in his place. This is what Jesus did and by paying our penalty in full. He both forgave AND wiped out the debt for evermore, never to be remembered against us any more.
 
Nov 16, 2019
300
119
43
...no sins that we commit in our lives will keep us out of heaven.
That is correct. That is what faith in Christ does for us. That's why we should keep having faith in Christ.

23Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful - Heb. 10:23 NAS

For if we turn our back in unbelief to Christ's ministry of forgiveness we lose access to that forgiveness. That is the one sin that can not be forgiven, the sin of blasphemy of the Spirit, because you can't have the benefit of God's forgiveness in Christ if you reject the testimony of the Spirit about that forgiveness.

12Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God. 13But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called “Today,” so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. - Hebrews 3:12-13 NAS