Tuesday, March 17, 2009

The Nature and Extent of the Atonement Q & A

by Danny Pelichowski

1. Did Christ die for sin universally? No
2. Did Christ die for sin universally in general? No
3. Did Christ die for sin universally yet specifically? No
4. Did Christ die for the sin of particular sinners? Yes
5. Did Christ die for sin in general for particular sinners? No
6. Did Christ die for specific sins of particular sinners? Yes
7. Is the atonement tied to God’s eternal election i.e. are those whom the Father elected the ones whom the son died? Yes
8. Is election effectual i.e. will those whom God the Father has elected as objects of mercy definitely be saved from their sins? Yes
9. Is the atonement effectual i.e. are all those whom God the Son died for definitely going to be saved from their sins? Yes
10. Are all men sinners and dead in their sins? Yes
11. Is every sinner equally able to produce faith in and of themselves? Of course not
12. Is every sinner capable of producing saving faith? Negative
13. Is the application of salvation conditional upon the faith of sinners? Yes
14. Can a sinner produce faith by his own nature? No
15. Do some sinners repent and have faith? Yes
16. Do all sinners repent and have faith? No
17. Then how can a sinner who is incapable of faith in and of himself produce saving faith that is necessary for salvation? He cannot! The answer is found in the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit bringing dead sinners to life so that they may understand, love, see, and hear the Gospel and repent and believe.
18. Does the Holy Spirit regenerate every person universally? No
19. For whom does the Holy Spirit regenerate? The elect of God
20. Why does he regenerate them? So that they may see their utter sinfulness and believe in the Gospel.
21. What is the Gospel? That Christ died to save sinners i.e. atone for specific sinners and specific sins effectually.

Doxology is the only appropriate response!

Praise God from whom all blessings flow, praise him all creatures here below, praise him above ye heavenly hosts, praise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Amen!

Friday, March 13, 2009

Socinus Resurrected: Answering objections to the doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement (part 2)

by Peter Phillips

Mungo Man said: “Am I understanding this right? God killed Christ? God (who is Love) killed wisdom (who is Christ). I’m not following this at all.”

Peter Phillips response:

Most certainly, the God who is love willfully planned and sent His Son to die and suffer at the hands of sinners, according to his foreordained purposes to redeem a people unto Himself. Let me unpack this biblically:

Paul says, “31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32 He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? 33 Who shall bring any charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. 34 Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us (Rom. 8:31-34)”

Please note that Paul says God did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all. If God graciously gave up his own Son, how much more will He not freely give us everything we need? The Christian’s freedom from sin and death came at a price—God had to send his Son to be a propitiation for our sins, so that we might enjoy relationship with Him through believing on the crucified Messiah.

In order to hold to your objection, you would have to deny the testimony of Luke’s account of God’s determined purpose in the crucifixion (Peter actually preached the sermon that contains this):

“Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know— 23 this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. 24 God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it (Acts 2:22-24).

Please note that Jesus was delivered up to be crucified, according to the “definite plan and foreknowledge of God.” But, this was not the end of the story; God raised Him from the dead, showing that he accepted Jesus sacrifice on behalf of sinners. The penal substitutionary atonement is a part of the willful plan of God to save sinners—that’s love, my friend. However, just in case we think that is a slip of the pen, we have many other texts that say the same kind of things.

When Peter and John were thrown into prison for preaching the gospel, they did not cease to trust in God’s plan. Notice how they pray upon their release. How do they view the events leading to the cross, and, of course, the crucifixion itself?

Acts 4:23-28 When they were released, they went to their friends and reported what the chief priests and the elders had said to them. 24 And when they heard it, they lifted their voices together to God and said, “Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them, 25 who through the mouth of our father David, your servant, said by the Holy Spirit, “‘Why did the Gentiles rage,
and the peoples plot in vain?
26 The kings of the earth set themselves,
and the rulers were gathered together,
against the Lord and against his Anointed’—27 for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, 28 to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.”

It may come as a shock, but the ones who betrayed, handed over, and crucified Jesus, did “whatever God’s hand and plan had predestined to take place.”

Perhaps you might object that this is not fair to Jesus, but this objection would certainly ignore that He willfully went to the Cross in obedience to His Father’s desires (John 10:17-18). Jesus actually rebukes Peter for trying to correct him when he said he must suffer and die on the cross:

Mark 8:31-33And he began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes and be killed, and after three days rise again. 32 And he said this plainly. And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. 33 But turning and seeing his disciples, he rebuked Peter and said, “Get behind me, Satan! For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man.”

In fact, according to the doctrine of penal substitution, Jesus died in this fashion to bring glory to himself (John 17:1; Phil. 2:8-9; Heb. 2:9) and to save his people (Rom. 5:8, 1 Pet. 3:18), as well as to glorify His Father. Jesus high priestly prayer, which takes place right before his crucifixion, conveys this sentiment well:

John 17:1-5When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, 2 since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. 3 And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. 4 I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the work that you gave me to do. 5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.”

This is a beautiful portrait of the Trinity at work in procuring the salvation of God’s people. The Father plans salvation in this way because it would satisfy his justice and demonstrate his love towards sinners. The Son joyfully and willfully accomplished the work of redemption with his perfect life, substitutionary death, and resurrection. The Son takes our sin upon Himself, dies in our place, and satisfies the demands of God’s just wrath against sinners. Lastly, the Holy Spirit applies the work of salvation to the believer by grace through faith in the Gospel.

Wednesday, March 4, 2009

Socinus Resurrected: Answering objections to the doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement (part 1)

by Peter Phillips

(This post was originally part of a debate that broke out over at Biblicalthought, regarding one of Danny's posts on the Doctrine of Penal Substitution, which was part of a larger paper on the nature and extent of the atonement [which you can find here on our Blog]. I hope to represent the discussion for you in full. But first, I will give you a bit of background to the sort of objection Mungo Man presents: he is presenting a less careful, largely incomplete, and diluted version of the 16th century arguments of Faustus Socinus. Who objected to the Penal Substitutionary atonement on moral, logical, and exegetical grounds. However, the Socinians were refuted decisively by none other than John Owen, who was henceforth referred to as the "Hammer of the Socinians." But, just so we don't think that Socinus's thought is a theological aberration that appears only once in history, we've decided to post this little clip of Emerging Church leader Brian Mclaren, who essentially says the same thing as Socinus and Mungo Man). Have a listen: Interview

Mungo Man said:

Am I understanding this right? God killed Christ? God (who is Love) killed wisdom (who is Christ). I’m not following this at all.

If God is Love, why can’t he just forgive us of our sins without killing something. It’s pretty barbaric, don’t you think? God’s self-image was so damaged by Adam’s sin; his “righteous anger” (does God get red in the face?), so enraged that he had to kill his only Son.

Is Jesus is asking us to be more mature than His Father? Christ told us to love our enemies . . . but God can’t? He hates with “righteous anger”. I have to pray for those who curse me . . . but God get’s to punish them eternally? And you’re calling that divine justice?

So, Salvation is God working out his own personal issues? His inner conflict of trying to figure out how he can love me?

I’m not feelin’ the love.

Peter Phillips response:

I want to thank you for giving me the opportunity and occasion to defend the glorious doctrine of penal substitution. Recently, I was discussing with Danny the importance of these issues, especially with respect to the Gospel. I hope to show you by the end of this post (or perhaps one more) that you really don’t have good news if Jesus did not die a substitutionary death for his people. Secondly, I want to address some of your objections to this biblical doctrine (I’ve decided to do this second, because it will make more sense after I give you the holistic biblical context).

Why should anyone believe in the substitutionary atonement of Christ? The first and foremost reason is that it is thoroughly biblical. From the Old Testament sacrificial system (which looks forward to Christ’s atonement) to the New Testament teaching (Jesus as the Lamb of God) of Christ’s propitiation for our sins, it is clear that the bible makes the substitutionary atonement of Christ central to its message. When you consider the institution of Passover during the Exodus (see Exodus 12), you plainly see the idea of subsitutionary atonement in view. The peculiar thing about the last plague upon Egypt was—that it was not specific in application to Egypt alone. The 10 plagues were God’s judgment upon Egypt for their worship of false God’s and other abominable practices, and thus, clearly an instance of God’s wrath towards sin and rebellion. However, the last plague is not directed at Egypt alone, but all the firstborns, including the Israelites (because they were caught up in the worship of the false gods of their Egyptian masters—Ezekiel 20:4-10). The only way to avert the wrath of God was to (by faith in God’s promise) slaughter the spotless Passover Lamb and cover the doorposts with blood. Thus, the Passover lamb was propitiatory (it turned away wrath) in nature. God would spare all the people who atoned for their sin in this fashion, but everybody else had God’s judgment fall upon them (death of their firstborns). Thus, the Passover/Exodus account is telling the story of how God always deals with sin and rebellion. He mercifully spares his people from his wrath and judgment, and he delivers them from their oppressive enemies by means of Judgment. One scholar says, “First, by means of the judgment of God there is salvation from the tyranny of the Egyptians. Secondly, by means of the Passover sacrifice there is salvation from the judgment of God. “ Paul picks this theme up in the NT when he states “Christ is our Passover Lamb (1 Cor. 5:7).” Christ died as an atonement for our sins, and in his death he turned away God’s wrath or satisfied his just wrath of God upon sinners (which we rightly deserve). The book of Romans says that “the wages of sin is death” and we have all sinned, thus we all are under the wrath of God’s judgment apart from Christ (Rom. 1-3). If God let people get away with sin and never judged it, then he would cease to be just. A god who is not just is capricious and immoral, but this is not the nature of the God of Scripture. He is just. But, He also loves, and He is love, John says. Here is the love of God, says the Apostle Paul, “but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us (Rom. 5:8). Why did Jesus have to die for us? because apart from Christ we are all by nature children of wrath (Eph. 2:3), namely, objects of divine wrath (as sinners who willfully rebel against their creator). In God’s love he sent his Son to be a subtitutionary sacrifice in our place, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God.

Eph. 2:1-10 says it nicely:

2:1 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins 2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— 3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. 4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— 6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

May I submit to you the proposition, “that you can’t really know the love of God, until you understand his just wrath upon you as a sinner.” He is the ultimate example of suffering love as a willing, innocent substitute for sinful people who deserve justice, but get mercy and grace. That, my friend, is the love of God for His people.

Let me close with a few explicit texts on penal substitution in the NT:

1 John 2:2- “He [Jesus] is the propitiation [turn away wrath] for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.”

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. By his wounds you have been healed.”

This last text is quoting from Isaiah 53, which is all about the Messiah dying in our place as a suffering servant. Another OT idea that is about substitutionary atonement is the Day of the Atonement, which is about sacrifice and substitution to avert God’s wrath upon Israel for sin, and subsequently bring God’s forgiveness. (Lev. 16). The doctrine of Penal substitution is Biblical, and there is no getting around it!