Skinski, if you are able to afford the time to explain i'd appreciate hearing this from you.
There is a wiki page but would like to hear it from you so i understand your prospective.
pm would be fine or it may others would also benefit to hear it here.
if i reply not this evening i'll be back Heavenly Father willing tomorrow.
Penal Substitution is basically the teaching that the believer swapped places with Jesus in a judicial sense.
The wages of sin is death (which is true). Therefore Jesus had all the sins of believers literally transferred to His account so that when God looked at Jesus He saw a guilty sinner. Jesus was then punished by God for being a guilty sinner. Thus the punishment is no longer due to the believer.
Attached to Penal Substitution is the teaching that the "obedience of Jesus" is literally transferred to the believers account.
So in other words the criminal record of the sinner is transferred to Jesus and He was punished for it. The perfect obedient track record of Jesus is transferred to the believer. Thus Jesus is a Penal Substitute for the sinner in a judicial sense.
The problem with this teaching is that it is not in the Bible. Jesus did not teach it nor did anyone else. A few Scriptures are used to support it like Psalm 53:4-5 but if you read those verses they do not say what people imply they say.
Isa 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
Isa 53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
Verse 4 says that "WE" esteemed Him stricken and smitten of God (from human perspective). Verse 5 says that Jesus was wounded, bruised and chastised on our behalf (due to our sin). Yet those verses do not say that Jesus absorbed the wrath of God as a guilty sinner on the cross.
Jesus was offered WITHOUT SPOT on our behalf.
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 from dead works to serve the living God?
Heb 9:14 contradicts the assertion that He was spotted with our sin. He "bore" our sin and suffered, He WAS NOT punished by God for our sin. Sin is moral and the guilt cannot be transferred to someone else. If the guilt was transferred to Jesus and He was punished instead of us then it means that God does not forgive those sins but punished another instead.
The real kicker with this doctrine is that it is only 400 years old. You will not find any reference to Penal Substitution in the early church. Some reformers will find a few references using the word "substitute" in some writings but if you read the context you'll see it has nothing whatsoever to do with Penal Substitution.
The real problem with Penal Substitution (besides it being 400 years old and not found in the Bible) is that it relegates reconciliation to God as a mere "judicial exchange" and thus the application is PURELY FORENSIC. This is why you'll hear many theologians use the term "forensic justification."
Penal Substitution serves to give a sinner an assurance that they have been reconciled to God (through the judicial swap) while they remain in rebellion. It negates the true purpose of a genuine broken repentance where the rebellion is forsaken and one comes into an agreement with God.
Penal Substitution in effect has God PRETENDING that the sinner is righteous because of the legal exchange. Thus true righteousness which is something that flows from a heart that has been made clean (through union with Christ) is relegated to a secondary position. Read my first post again as I list some of my very specific objections to the doctrine. I view it as an extremely dangerous doctrine.
I linked the Wikipedia article because it describes how the doctrine developed. There have been quite a few views of the atonement throughout history. The early Church held to the Ransom, Moral Influence and Christis Victor views. Thus they taught that the death of Jesus on the cross was so that "we could die with Him."
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Carefully read the above Scripture. The wages of sin is death. Eternal life is THROUGH Jesus Christ.
Not carefully look at this Scripture...
Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
There are two laws. One law is that of sin and death. You sin you die! Yet God has given us a GIFT, a way out. That way out is THROUGH Jesus Christ. Notice in Rom 6:23 that IT DOES NOT SAY the "wages of righteousness is eternal life." This is because once someone sins the guilt cannot be undone, the conscience is permanently defiled. A return to obedience cannot undo what was done before. Without the sacrifice of Jesus Christ the sinner is doomed.
So what Jesus did was He came to this earth and lives a perfectly obedient life of walking after the Spirit. He was an example for us. He offered Himself on behalf of our sins (sin offering) so that we can die with Him. Jesus basically reconciled the whole human race to God THROUGH HIM. Yet we have to ACCESS this gift.
Jesus purchased us from death and slavery (to sin) by His blood but we have to choose as to whether we leave death and slavery. This is why we must DIE WITH HIM.
Rom 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
Rom 6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
Rom 6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
Rom 6:7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.
It is through DYING WITH HIM that we can be RAISED WITH HIM. Dying with Him means we crucify out old rebellious life, Paul calls it the "old man." That old man who earned death for sin must perish, either in this life, or at the judgment. We get to choose.
It is the SPIRIT OF LIFE IN JESUS CHRIST which sets us free. That is a life of walking in submission to the Spirit of God. We basically approach God through repentance and faith completely broken over our rebellion. We forsake our old ways and cry out to God for mercy. The blood of Jesus Christ purifies our consciences, it removes the guilt. It removes the curse of the law.
Heb 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
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 from dead works to serve the living God?
Heb 9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
But WE have to die with Him. There is no DYING WITH HIM in Penal Substitution. That is why they do not preach on the crucifixion of the flesh. They treat the death of Christ as a judicial provision which you access simply by "trusting that it happened." There is no death of the old man, there is no cessation of rebellion, there is no crucifixion of the flesh. That is why it is so dangerous.
Penal Substitution, as i sad earlier, immunises the mind against the truth. If one is totally convinced that their salvation is rooted in the judicial exchange of Penal Substitution then it can be TERRIFYING to have it challenged because the person will feel naked before God. Also when one is confused about the issue, "questioning the doctrine" will often be viewed as delving into dangerous heresy. They'll feel like they are denying Christ because they have held onto this teaching for so long. Penal Substitution is a very powerful stronghold in the mind.
Yet those who hold it ought to really think about it. REALLY REALLY THINK ABOUT IT.
Why didn't the early church teach it?
Why is it only 400 years old?
They need to answer those questions.