General Atonement theories

[benadam1974]

Penal Substitution​

I was recently sent an article titled Jesus Did Not Die on the Cross For Our Sins: The idea Jesus “paid the price” isn’t found in the Bible.

Jesus Did Not Die on the Cross For Our Sins

There is some misconception about why Jesus really died on the cross. It was not to pay a penalty or price for the sins of this world, according to the Bible.

www.beliefnet.com

"No matter how hard you search, you will not find a single passage in the entire Bible that says anything about Jesus paying the penalty for our sins. That’s because this is a “Christian belief” that the Bible doesn’t teach. Rather it was a theology created by humans."
"There are some limited verses that speak about Jesus’ death in relation to our sins, but they only point to Jesus' death somehow being related to our sins, but not that His death was a substitute or penalty because of our sins."
But a quick search of the scriptures shows verse after verse saying how Christ's death paid for our sins, including the following explicit references:

Mark 10:45 NET
“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.”
• NET Bible study note adds that the Greek word for ransom is found here and in Matt 20:28 and refers to the payment of a price in order to purchase the freedom of a slave.
So Jesus paid the price with his own life by standing in humanity’s place as a substitute.

Luke in Acts 20:28
Look after yourselves and everyone the Holy Spirit has placed in your care.
Be like shepherds to God's church.
It is the flock he bought with the blood of his own Son.

Paul to the Corinthians, 1Cor 7:
22 For he who was a slave when he was called by the Lord is the Lord’s freedman. Conversely, he who was a free man when he was called is Christ’s slave.
23 You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men.

Peter in his 1st letter 1:18-19
For you know that God paid a ransom to save you from the empty life you inherited from your ancestors.
And it was not paid with mere gold or silver, which lose their value.
But with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot.

The Apostle John in Rev 5:9
Angels in heaven will sing a new song:
"You are worthy to take the scroll and to break open its seals.
For you were killed, and by your sacrificial death you bought for God people from every tribe, language, nation, and race."
NOTE: these scriptures are not saying that in order to satisfy the anger and wrath of God (as Reformers like Calvin and Luther taught) God had to take out His rage on His own Son like some mad, impetuous, tyrannical father.
Also, consider the fact that penal substitution theories depend on the doctrine of the Trinity. In other words, because we have sinned against God, so they say, only God Himself (in the Person of the Son) could atone for sins.
The title of the book on atonement by St. Anselm, one of the most influential proponents of penal substitution, asks: Why God became man?
This just shows how far early Christianity had already drifted away from the faith once delivered to the saints. The fact is the Bible teaches the human Son of God himself suffered and with his death paid for your sins.

So remember, Jesus gave his life to purchase freedom for everyone; the innocent for the guilty.
And he did this to bring all of you to God.

 

[KevinGeorge]

Wow. The verses you chose to prove a payment are miserable translations! The underlying Greek refutes the payment idea. I will post more about this when I can, but a lot of this is documented here: https://atonementandreconciliation.com/chapter-10-ransom-and-redemption/

 

[benadam1974]

Wow. The verses you chose to prove a payment are miserable translations! The underlying Greek refutes the payment idea. I will post more about this when I can, but a lot of this is documented here: https://atonementandreconciliation.com/chapter-10-ransom-and-redemption/

Perhaps a public debate would benefit the public better, let me know.

 

[KevinGeorge]

My wifi quit yesterday. I will be back when that is fixed.

 

[benadam1974]

My wifi quit yesterday. I will be back when that is fixed.

No worries, email me to discuss debate format, times, etc.
carlos@thehumanjesus.org

 

[KevinGeorge]

I am sorry to be slow to respond. At the moment our internet provider is down so I am at a public library responding to emails. So, if you don’t get a quick reply from me that is probably why, until they repair the problem.

 

[KevinGeorge]

I would look forward to interacting with you about the atonement topic. However, just like the Trinity topic, there are multiple levels to deal with. There is the textual side, the historical, the legal/ethical, side, as well as dealing with definitions of doctrinal terms which are often packed with theological meaning that has developed over time.

Due to the complex nature of the topic, I don’t think a debate is the best way to handle it. A discussion is more in order, where two people who see a particular level from a particular angle can compare notes. A debate is more about winning, while a discussion is more about sharing.

I will send you my cell phone number by email.

 

[KevinGeorge]

I read the linked article and I have to say that it is poorly written. Not one example of a biblical text is dealt with.

Regarding the verses that use the word "ransom" or "redemption", here is what I see:

The words “ransom” and “redeem” are mercantile terms, but they are frequently used metaphorically to describe releasing or freeing from what or who is holding the person in bondage.

For example, “redeeming the time” (Eph. 5:16), “redeemed us from the curse” (Gal. 3:13), “redeem those under the law” (Gal. 4:5), “redeem us from all lawlessness” (Titus 2:14), and “redeemed from the empty way of life” (1 Peter 1:18). None of these statements involve a transfer of a payment from one party to another. They are indicating a release. (See also Exodus 6:6, 15:13, Psalm 74:2, Rev. 5:9.)

These are metaphors like when we read “heavy heart” or “my yoke is easy”, being a “slave to sin”, or “dead to sin”. Ransom, redeem, and purchase are also metaphors in this sense, as Jesus did not make a literal transaction. Jesus redeemed us, set us free from the bondage of sin, so we would be the servants of God and display God’s righteousness. For this reason, God is justified in passing over former sins (Romans 3:25).

Psalm 74:2 is a good example of “purchase” and “redeem” being metaphors. “Remember Your congregation, which You have purchased of old, Which You have redeemed to be the tribe of Your inheritance; And this Mount Zion, where You have dwelt.” The point here is that Israel belongs to God because God is the one who directly intervened to do what was needed to liberate Israel from bondage. In Psalm 74, the psalmist is praying and requesting God to remember that Israel belongs to Him because it was He who set them free from their bondage.

For whatever reason, most people are taught that to redeem is primarily to make a payment. But no payment was made here. What was paid? To whom was it paid? No, to redeem is primarily to set something free. Sometimes it involves a literal payment, but that is secondary to being set free, or released. The purchase is also metaphorical, because nobody literally got paid anything when Israel was set free from Egypt.

A similar verse is Exodus 15:13, part of the song of Moses immediately after the Red Sea crossing, “Thou in thy mercy hast led forth the people which thou hast redeemed: thou hast guided them in thy strength unto thy holy habitation.” Was Moses saying God made some literal payment to Pharaoh in a literal redemptive purchase? No, the word “redeemed” is being used to show freedom, liberty, or release, not a payment.

 

[benadam1974]

I would look forward to interacting with you about the atonement topic. However, just like the Trinity topic, there are multiple levels to deal with. There is the textual side, the historical, the legal/ethical, side, as well as dealing with definitions of doctrinal terms which are often packed with theological meaning that has developed over time.

Due to the complex nature of the topic, I don’t think a debate is the best way to handle it. A discussion is more in order, where two people who see a particular level from a particular angle can compare notes. A debate is more about winning, while a discussion is more about sharing.

I will send you my cell phone number by email.

Thanks and hope we can come to an agreement to better serve the public.

 

[KevinGeorge]

Here are my thoughts regarding Matthew 20:28 and Mark 10:45 regarding the words "ransom for many" and atonement, showing that this cannot be literal and there is a translation problem:

Matthew 20:28 “Just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many." NASB

Mark 10:45 “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.” NASB

The Greek word for ransom is “lytron”, and its primary usage was in reference to a release, not a payment. By giving his life for service to God and others he was releasing them, freeing them from their bondage to sin and to a very legalistic religious bondage imposed by the religious leaders who made rules far in excess of the Mosaic law.

If the word “ransom” is to be taken literally, then this brings up many serious questions, such as,

1. Who was holding humanity hostage?
2. How did the previous person gain legal custody to be able to sell us?
3. How can someone be so strong as to hold humanity hostage to the degree that God needs to pay to release them?
4. Where do we read about this transaction?
5. Did a blood payment to release the hostages get transferred to the kidnapper?
6. If Satan is the kidnapper, does Satan have the blood of Christ?
7. If God is the kidnapper, does not this result in additional absurdities?
8. Who bought us, Jesus or God?
9. What exactly was literally bought? (Souls? Spirits? Bodies? Rights?)
10. If someone turns from the faith, are they sold back? Does the Devil (or whoever) get a refund? What would be refunded – blood?

Both of these passages of Matthew 20:28 and Mark 10:45 have a glaring translation problem when they are read in their full context, copied below. Both are parallel passages of an account when there was a discussion about future positions in the coming kingdom of Christ, yet Jesus turned their dreams upside down with his response - but his response is still within the original topic under discussion. Please take notice that the topic under discussion was nothing to do with atonement or sin, it was position and power.

Another clue to the translation problem, but only visible in the Greek language, is the word "anti" in the final phrase translated as "ransom for [anti] many." This word means "against, contrary, in opposition to, in contrast to, opposite to, etc.". When the phrase is changed to "as a ransom, in contrast to many", it is easily seen that he was contrasting his ultimate end with what he was asking from his followers. He offered his followers lives of servants in contrast to positions of power, and as for himself, he would end up giving his own life as a ransom in contrast to others who want to keep their life. The ransom price of giving up his life, if we are to read it semi-literally, would be the only way out of the legal and political trouble that he was getting into - he was going to die, as he had previously already disclosed to them (Matthew 16:21). Here is the full context copied from the NASB, but with the final word "for" switched with ", in contrast to".

"Then the mother of the sons of Zebedee came to Jesus with her sons, bowing down and making a request of Him. And He said to her, “What do you desire?” She said to Him, “Say that in Your kingdom these two sons of mine shall sit, one at Your right, and one at Your left.” But Jesus replied, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink?” They *said to Him, “We are able.” He *said to them, “My cup you shall drink; but to sit at My right and at My left left is not Mine to give, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by My Father.” And after hearing this, the other ten disciples became indignant with the two brothers. But Jesus called them to Himself and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles domineer over them, and those in high position exercise authority over them. It is not this way among you, but whoever wants to become prominent among you shall be your servant, and whoever desires to be first among you shall be your slave; just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom, in contrast to many.” Matthew 20:20-28 NASB

Many people, probably most people, are not willing to give their life as a ransom in martyrdom for a cause. But in contrast to the majority, Jesus was willing to die for his cause, in obedience to his Father. Indeed, he did this a few days later.

Note also that verse 28 starts with "just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve,...". The "just as" indicates a continuation of what he had just asked them to do, to be a slave in service for others. The entire topic was a contrast between a worldly pursuit of power versus being willing to be a slave, and obedience unto death. Nothing in this passage indicates that the topic of atonement was even remotely under consideration. Furthermore, the idea of penal, substitutionary atonement had never even been taught in the Old Testament, so they had no reason to think along that line at all. They believed that Jesus was going to take the throne and rule as Messiah; they had no thought of him dying to pay a penalty for sin.

 

[WantMyCloak]

1. Who was holding humanity hostage?
2. How did the previous person gain legal custody to be able to sell us?
3. How can someone be so strong as to hold humanity hostage to the degree that God needs to pay to release them?
4. Where do we read about this transaction?
5. Did a blood payment to release the hostages get transferred to the kidnapper?
6. If Satan is the kidnapper, does Satan have the blood of Christ?
7. If God is the kidnapper, does not this result in additional absurdities?
8. Who bought us, Jesus or God?
9. What exactly was literally bought? (Souls? Spirits? Bodies? Rights?)
10. If someone turns from the faith, are they sold back? Does the Devil (or whoever) get a refund? What would be refunded – blood?

Hello Kevin,

Consider
1) Death. Humanity was held hostage because of their inability to obey.

2)The previous person is GOD. Because the breach of contract at Eden, there was a denial of Services and Means. God's Person and His Belongings are His to give. No one else

3) God. God's Requirements to access the Tree of Life must be paid in full. If there is a dress code, it is incumbent on the guest to dress appropriately.

4) You may eat freely from every tree of the garden, but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil;

5) The blood payment was the fulfillment of the Noahide Covenant. The Perfect Life for the sins of the antediluvian excesses (murder, rape and murder, etc..) progenies of Adam.

6) ha_satan lives on your right hand and might leave a mark if you let him. satan is a figment of human and angelic pride and fear.

7) God did not kidnap. He denies the unworthy. The captivity is the denial by humanity of God's Glory.

8) Jesus' birth, life and death, fulfilled all the Covenants with God, His name proved superior to the angels and he was given the authority to the whole kit and kaboodle, Jesus then commanded the cherubim guarding the Tree of Life to let in those who are worthy (Book of Life). Jesus was the ransom (price). God gave the Ransom (His Only Begotten Son)

9) Right to the Tree of Life. Right to the New Jerusalem.

10) Turning from the faith is denial of the authority of Christ to redeem you. With gifts, you should recognize the giver, Then a relationship can be had. Why spend anytime with a stranger that ignores you.
The devil's fate is the Lake of Fire as with those who are estranged from God. They are worthless in the Eyes of God and are not given a ticket to Paradise (redemption)
Covenants >>>
a) The root of Jesse - birthed by Mary.
b) The Davidic Kingdom - Son of God, David bowed to the Right Hand Seat of God.
c) Moses - Jesus fulfilled the Law. Pericope Adulterae extrapolated.
d) Abraham - Circumcision of the spirit not the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.
e) Noah - "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man" The perfect genome of the antediluvians was paid in full by the perfect genome of Jesus. The death of Jesus fulfilled the required penalties of Adam's fall. Our degraded genome was insufficient.