Again an example where, because Penal Substitution is so ingrained, believers in it simply don’t check the facts. The whole premise behind this article below is based on the notion that Jesus cried out that he was forsaken at the beginning of the 3 hours of darkness. Wrong! (Matt 27:46, Mark 15:34).Continue reading “Blind faith”
This has been simmering on the back-boiler for a while, and now is the time for sharing. It is a (hopefully!) comprehensive rebuttal of Penal Substitution from a purely Scriptural point of view, rather than examining the logical inconsistencies*.
It is primarily aimed at encouraging those who have been taught Penal Substitution to openly examine the Gospel narratives for themselves. It has a flow: providing logical follow-on questions and a response to each.
It may also encourage those who are uncomfortable with Penal Substitution to realise they are on far more solid ground Scripturally!
Feel free to share with others if you find it helpful.
* For a good logical argument, I recommend this post: https://vaporsinthewind.com/2018/04/03/10-reasons-why-i-have-rejected-penal-substitution/
This Q&A with Brad Jersak gives a great illustration of where our own theology now sits. The Q&A starts with an intro and history of Brad’s early ministry, so if you want to cut to the ‘and how has my theology changed’ piece, that starts at about 20 mins in.
Hope you enjoy it (Oh, and be warned: there are a few “making s**t up” comments which are part of a shared joke, as becomes clear later in the chat).
Now that we are re-thinking the sacrificial system and how it pertains to Jesus’s sacrifice, many questions arise. Here a Presbyterian asks a key question over on PTM’s website, and Brad Jersak provides a clear and really helpful response…
Isaiah 53 is consistently used as a proof text for the penal substitution theory of the atonement. Whilst there is no doubt that this chapter contains prophetic echoes of Jesus’ sacrifice, we should not simply assume that we can apply the entire text literally to the events of Golgotha. The litmus test for how to understand Isaiah 53 must come from the New Testament and the Apostles.
Let’s examine all the specific verses from Isaiah 53 which are either utilised or directly quoted in the New Testament. Continue reading “Isaiah 53 in the New Testament (the Apostles’ teaching)”
In John’s gospel Jesus categorically states that he would not be left alone by the Father.
There is one oft overlooked problem with claiming that the Father abandoned Jesus, and that is that the Gospel narratives do not bear it out. Let’s examine them.
- Was Jesus abandoned by his Father?
John’s Gospel provides us with two very specific statements from Jesus about his coming death – and the shock is that Jesus categorically states says that he would not be left alone by the Father. Continue reading “The Gospel Narrative: Never Alone”
Although we watched the “Monster God or Monster Man” debate between Dr Michael Brown and Brian Zahnd some time ago, we only recently stumbled across this interesting review of it (which contains a link to the debate). The debate is a great starting point to get a handle on the issues… and then Rob Grayson’s review provides helpful reflection.
We recently came across this article by Derek Vreeland. It is a thoughtful piece and makes a helpful contribution to the debate. You’ll need to read it through to the end, though, or you’ll entirely miss the point he’s making:
In this excellent article, Nick demonstrates why we need to understand Jesus’ cry of abandonment as a prayer, and that the entire Psalm was clearly in mind. He also addresses some of the issues with trying to use the ‘cry’ from the Gospel narrative as the basis for forming doctrine.
As long as our thinking remains shaped by the scheme of this age… our understanding of the cross will inevitably be conformed to the world’s ideas of justice and peace
Darrin W. Snyder Belousek has written a book that anyone and everyone who holds to the Penal Substitution view of the Atonement should read. Deftly and carefully he examines our presuppositions against the biblical text.
Early on, as he sets out the purpose of writing this book, he quotes J. Lawrence Burkholder:
“…the Bible is seldom, if ever, approached without presuppositions. They change from age to age. Frequently they reflect quite unconsciously a framework of meaning and habits of thought that are supplied by the prevailing world view.” Continue reading “Atonement and the nature of God’s Justice”