VICARIOUS ATONEMENT (PENAL SUBSTITUTIONARY ATONEMENT—PSA)

 

 

These terms represent the belief that Jesus had suffered death, the innocent for the guilty, for the payment of our sins, to satisfy God’s righteous nature. This is supported by these verses:

Isaiah 53:5–6 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. 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.

Romans 3:23–26—All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith. He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies the one who has faith in Jesus.

2 Corinthians 5:21—For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

Galatians 3:10, 13—All who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, 'Cursed be every one who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, and do them.' ... Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us – for it is written, “Cursed be every one who hangs on a tree."

Colossians 2:13–15—And you, who were dead in trespasses and uncircumcision of your flesh having cancelled the bond which stood against us with its legal demands; this he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the principalities and powers and made a public example of them, triumphing over them in him.

1 Peter 2:24—He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness.

1 Peter 3:18—For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God.

However, there are other views on the atonement— the death of Jesus—despite the overwhelming Biblical testimony in its favor.

 

The first extensive criticism of the penal substitution came during the Reformation period from within the Anabaptist movement by Fausto Sozzini. (I will write my response in the bold):

1.     Perfect satisfaction for sin, even by way of substitution, leaves no room for divine forgiveness or pardon. There is no contradiction between PSA and divine forgiveness!

2. It is unjust both to punish the innocent and to allow the guilty to go free. Allowing the guilty to go free is grace. Besides, the innocent Jesus suffers the Cross in any event!

3. The finite suffering and temporary death of one is disproportionate to the infinite suffering and permanent death of many. The death of Jesus is also of infinite value!

4. The grace of perfect satisfaction would appear to confer on its beneficiaries a freedom to sin without consequence. Again, this is the Biblical grace of God! (Wikipedia) 

Christus Victor is the dominant atonement theory of the Eastern Orthodox Church. Michael Machuga, sums it up:

•        Satan has enslaved humanity with the fear of death (Heb 2:14–15). All manners of evil arise from this bondage. But Christ comes to set humanity free from Satan’s power, that is, “to destroy the devil’s work” (1 Pet 5:8). He does so by enduring the cross and by then being raised to life by God (Acts 2:23–25). In doing so, Christ “disarmed the rulers and authorities, exposing them to public disgrace by leading them in a triumphal parade” (Col 2:15). Christ is made Lord (Rom 14:11; Phil 2:11), given the Name above all names (Phil 2:9), and will reign until death, the last enemy, is destroyed (1 Cor 15:24–26). Death will then be cast into the lake of fire (Rev 20:10, 14) so that “God may be all in all” (1 Cor 15:28). https://www.patheos.com/blogs/allsetfree/2018/01/saved-god-alternatives-penal-substitution-atonement-theory/

You might not find anything wrong with this summation. I don’t. It is entirely Biblical. However, it does not contradict the PSA. Instead, it serves as a useful addition. Why then the continuing opposition to PSA among the various Bible-believing churches?