Penal substitution according to John Crowder

[Lucian Hodoboc]

Somehow, this view of the reason for Christ's death makes me feel somewhat closer to God. What are your thoughts about what John Crowder says in this video. Is it heresy?

 

[New Age Outlaw]

Penalty substitution

God never forsake his son despite popular belief. If Jesus and God are one why was Jesus so loving and God so hateful?

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[Lucian Hodoboc]

If Jesus and God are one why was Jesus so loving and God so hateful?

He wasn't hateful. Justice is in His nature, and so is love. According to penal substitution supporters, God had to find a solution for reconciling the two sides of His nature without destroying us. And sacrificing one of His persons as a substitutionary sacrifice for our sins was His solution. It does sound logical.

 

[New Age Outlaw]

God didn't have to find a solution his solution was know b4 the foundation of the world (ephesians)

I believe he did it out of love and not to fill some wrathful feelings he had.

For example Israel was always committing spiritual adultery against God. God was always trying to better the relationship telling the do this and our marriage relationship will grow and flourish.

It's like if my wife commented adultery on me I would get mad because I care ab the relationship try to give all I have to better it and apparently she didn't.

Same logic with God and Israel but instead of divorcing Israel he sent his son to die to fullfill what Israel couldn't so any that believe in christ is true Israel.

Sounds like a love story not a wrath story.

Wrath went to those under law tho:
for the Law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, there also is no violation.
Romans 4:15

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[Lucian Hodoboc]

@psalms 91 , why are you agreeing with this? I thought you were a Protestant.

 

[Josiah]

There are several ATONEMENT THEORIES.... all quite ancient, all quite biblical, all seemingly falling short.

This we know: Atonement/Justification required Jesus, it required the Incarnation of God, it required His perfect life/absolute righteousness, it required His sacrificial death, and (it seems above all) His victorious resurrection. THAT seems clear!

But WHY? That's where it gets a bit... well.... undisclosed. There arose several different paradigms, several different ways of putting all this, and these were all highly developed by the early Middle Ages. Augustine, Luther, Calvin all seemed to like the Christus Victor view.... modern American "Evangelicals" seem to like the "vicarious" view... there are several more. All seem great - as far as they go, but all seem to have limitations.

My take: Jesus' incarnation, life, death and resurrection were ALL completely, absolutely necessary! WHY? Um.... there's some mystery there. But THIS IS THE POINT: The necessary was provided and fulfilled - completely, perfectly - BY JESUS. That's the point. That's the Gospel.



.

 

[psalms 91]

@psalms 91 , why are you agreeing with this? I thought you were a Protestant.

What did I agree with that is wrong, I missed something so tell me where I went wrong it sounds good to me

 

[Lucian Hodoboc]

What did I agree with that is wrong, I missed something so tell me where I went wrong it sounds good to me

I'm not one to decide what's right and wrong. I'm just confused about why you're agreeing with a doctrine that's different than (and somewhat opposing to) the Protestant Penal Substitution doctrine.