The SBJT Forum: The Atonement under Fire - Revision history

Kathyyee: Protected "The SBJT Forum: The Atonement under Fire" ([edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite))

Kathyyee — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 14:30:34 GMT

Protected "The SBJT Forum: The Atonement under Fire" ([edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite))

← Older revision

Revision as of 14:30, 30 June 2010

JoyaTeemer at 18:32, 10 February 2010

JoyaTeemer — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:32:40 GMT

JoyaTeemer at 18:17, 10 February 2010

JoyaTeemer — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:17:40 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:17, 10 February 2010
Line 15:		Line 15:
	brief, I shall list a handful of developments		brief, I shall list a handful of developments
	that have contributed to this sad		that have contributed to this sad
-	state of affairs.~~<ref>This essay is also available in digital form at http://www.thegospelcoalition.org.</ref>~~	+	state of affairs.

	(1) In recent years it has become popular		(1) In recent years it has become popular
Line 346:		Line 346:
	Sach, ''Pierced for Our Transgressions: Rediscovering the Glory of Penal Substitution''		Sach, ''Pierced for Our Transgressions: Rediscovering the Glory of Penal Substitution''
	(InterVarsity, 2007)		(InterVarsity, 2007)
-
-	~~'''Notes'''~~
-
-	~~<references />~~

JoyaTeemer: Created page with '{{info}} ''Editor’s Note:'' Readers should be aware of the forum’s format. D. A. Carson, Thomas R. Schreiner, Bruce A. Ware, and James Hamilton have been asked specifi c que...'

JoyaTeemer — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:17:05 GMT

Created page with '{{info}} ''Editor’s Note:'' Readers should be aware of the forum’s format. D. A. Carson, Thomas R. Schreiner, Bruce A. Ware, and James Hamilton have been asked specifi c que...'

New page

{{info}}

''Editor’s Note:'' Readers should be aware of the forum’s format. D. A. Carson,
Thomas R. Schreiner, Bruce A. Ware, and James Hamilton have been asked
specifi c questions to which they have provided written responses. These writers are not
responding to one another. The journal’s goal for the Forum is to provide signifi cant
thinkers’ views on topics of interest without requiring lengthy articles from these
heavily-committed individuals. Their answers are presented in an order that hopefully
makes the forum read as much like a unifi ed presentation as possible.

'''SBJT: What are some of the reasons why the doctrine of penal substitution is again coming under attack?'''

'''D. A. Carson:''' A book could usefully be
written on this subject. To keep things
brief, I shall list a handful of developments
that have contributed to this sad
state of affairs.<ref>This essay is also available in digital form at http://www.thegospelcoalition.org.</ref>

(1) In recent years it has become popular
to sketch the Bible’s story-line something
like this: Ever since the fall, God has
been active to reverse the effects of sin. He
takes action to limit sin’s damage; he calls
out a new nation, the Israelites, to mediate
his teaching and his grace to others; he
promises that one day he will come as the
promised Davidic king to overthrow sin
and death and all their wretched effects.
This is what Jesus does: he conquers
death, inaugurates the kingdom of righteousness,
and calls his followers to live
out that righteousness now in prospect of
the consummation still to come.

Much of this description of the Bible’s
story-line, of course, is true. Yet it is so
painfully reductionistic that it introduces
a major distortion. It collapses human
rebellion, God’s wrath, and assorted
disasters into one construct, namely, the
degradation of human life, while depersonalizing
the wrath of God. It thus fails
to wrestle with the fact that from the
beginning, sin is an offense ''against God''.
God himself pronounces the sentence
of death (Genesis 2-3). This is scarcely
surprising, since God is the source of
all life, so if his image-bearers spit in his
face and insist on going their own way
and becoming their own gods, they cut
themselves off from their Maker, from
the One who gives life. What is there,
then, but death? Moreover, when we sin
in any way, God himself is invariably the
most offended party (Psalm 51). The God
the Bible portrays as resolved to intervene
and save is also the God portrayed as
full of wrath because of our sustained
idolatry. As much as he intervenes to save
us, he stands over against us as Judge, an
offended Judge with fearsome jealousy.

Nor is this a matter of Old Testament
theology alone. When Jesus announced
the imminence of the dawning of the
kingdom, like John the Baptist he cried,
“Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is
near” (Matt 4:17; cf. Mark 1:15). Repentance
is necessary, because the coming of
the King promises judgment as well as
blessing. The sermon on the mount, which
encourages Jesus’ disciples to turn the
other cheek, repeatedly warns them to flee
the condemnation of the gehenna of fire.
The sermon warns the hearers not to follow
the broad road that leads to destruction,
and pictures Jesus pronouncing fi nal
judgment with the words, “I never knew
you. Away from me, you evildoers!” (7:23).
The parables are replete with warnings of
fi nal judgment; a signifi cant percentage
of them demonstrate the essential divisiveness
of the dawning of the kingdom.
Images of hell—outer darkness, furnace
of fi re, weeping and gnashing of teeth,
undying worms, eternal fire—are too
ghastly to contemplate long. After Jesus’
resurrection, when Peter preaches on the
day of Pentecost, he aims to convince
his hearers that Jesus is the promised
Messiah, that his death and resurrection
are the fulfi llment of Scripture, and that
God “has made this Jesus, whom you
crucifi ed [he tells them], both Lord and
Christ” (Acts 2:36). That is every bit as
much threat as promise: the hearers are
“cut to the heart” and cry, “What shall
we do?” (2:37). That is what elicits Peter’s
“Repent and believe” (3:38). When Peter
preaches to Cornelius and his household,
the climax of his moving address is that
in fulfi llment of Scripture God appointed
Jesus “as judge of the living and the
dead”—and thus not of Jews only. Those
who believe in him receive “forgiveness
of sins through his name”: transparently,
that is what is essential if we are to face
the judge and emerge unscathed. When
he preaches to the Athenian pagan intellectuals,
Paul, as we all know, fills in
some of the great truths that constitute
the matrix in which alone Jesus makes
sense: monotheism, creation, who human
beings are, God’s aseity and providential
sovereignty, the wretchedness and danger
of idolatry. Before he is interrupted,
however, Paul gets to the place in his
argument where he insists that God has
set a day “when he will judge the world
with justice”—and his appointed judge
is Jesus, whose authoritative status is
established by his resurrection from the
dead. When Felix invites the apostle to
speak “about faith in Christ Jesus” (Acts
24:24), Paul, we are told, discourses “on
righteousness, self-control and the judgment
to come” (24:15): apparently such
themes are an irreducible part of faithful
gospel preaching. Small wonder, then,
that Felix was terrifi ed (24:25). The Letter
to the Romans, which many rightly take
to be, at very least, a core summary of the
apostle’s understanding of the gospel,
fi nds Paul insisting that judgment takes
place “on the day when God will judge
men’s secrets through Jesus Christ, ''as my gospel declares''” (Rom 2:16). Writing to the
Thessalonians, Paul reminds us that Jesus
“rescues us from the coming wrath” (1
Thess 1:10). This Jesus will be “revealed
from heaven in blazing fi re with his powerful
angels. He will punish those who do
not know God and do not obey the ''gospel''
of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished
with everlasting destruction and shut out
from the presence of the Lord and from
the majesty of his power on the day he
comes to be glorifi ed in his holy people
and to be marveled at among all those
who have believed” (2 Thess 1:7-10). We
await “a Savior from [heaven], the Lord
Jesus Christ”—and what this Savior saves
us from (the context of Phil 3:19-20 shows)
is the destiny of destruction. “Like the
rest, we were by nature objects of wrath”
(Eph 2:3), for we gratifi ed “the cravings of
our sinful nature . . . following its desires
and thoughts” (2:3)—but now we have
been ''saved'' by grace through faith, created
in Christ Jesus to do good works (Eph 2:8-
10). This grace thus saves us both from
sins and from their otherwise inevitable
result, the wrath to come. Jesus himself
is our peace (Ephesians 2; Acts 10:36).
“The wrath of God is being revealed
from heaven against all the godlessness
and wickedness of human beings who
suppress the truth by their wickedness”
(Rom 1:18). But God presented Christ as
a propitiation in his blood” (3:25), and
now “we have peace with God through
our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we
have gained access by faith into this grace
in which we now stand” (5:1-2).

Time and space fail to allow refl ection
on how the sacrifi ce of Christ in the Letter
to the Hebrews is what alone enables
us to escape the terror of those who fall
into the hands of the living God, who is a
consuming fi re, or on how the Apocalypse
presents the Lamb as the slaughtered sacrifi
ce, even while warning of the danger of
falling under the wrath of the Lamb.

This nexus of themes—God, sin, wrath,
death, judgment—is what stands behind
the simple words of, say, 1 Cor 15:3: as a
matter of fi rst importance, Paul tells us,
“Christ died for our sins.” Parallel texts
instantly leap to mind: “[Christ] was
delivered over to death for our sins, and
was raised to life for our justifi cation”
(Rom 4:25). “Christ died for the ungodly”
(Rom 5:6). The Lord Jesus Christ “gave
himself for our sins, to rescue us from
the present evil age” (Gal 1:4). “Christ
died for sins once for all, the righteous
for the unrighteous, to bring you to
God” (1 Pet 3:18). Or, as Paul puts it in 1
Cor 15:2, “By this gospel you are ''saved''.”
To be saved from our sins is to be saved
not only from their chaining power but
from their consequences—and the consequences
are profoundly bound up with
God’s solemn sentence, with God’s holy
wrath. Once you see this, you cannot fail
to see that whatever else the cross does,
it must rightly set aside God’s sentence, it
must rightly set aside God’s wrath, or it
achieves nothing.

(2) Some popular slogans that have
been deployed to belittle the doctrine of
penal substitution betray painful misconceptions
of what the Bible says about
our Triune God. The best known of these
appalling slogans, of course, is that penal
substitution is a form of “cosmic child
abuse.” This conjures up a wretched picture
of a vengeful God taking it out on
his Son, who had no choice in the matter.
Instead of invoking the Triune God of
the Bible, this image implicitly pictures
interactions between two separable Gods,
the Father and the Son. But this is a painful
caricature of what the Bible actually
says. In fact, I do not know of any serious
treatment of the doctrine of penal substitution,
undertaken by orthodox believers,
that does not carefully avoid falling into
such traps.

Consider Rom 5:8: “But God demonstrates
his own love for us in this: While
we were still sinners Christ died for us.”
This verse is coherent ''only'' if Christ himself
is God. The cross is not Christ’s idea alone,
conjured up to satisfy his bad-tempered
Father. The Triune God, our Creator and
our Judge, could have, in perfect justice,
consigned us all to the pit. Instead, the
Father so loved us as to send his Son, ''himself God'', to bear our sins in his own body
on the tree. Moreover, the Bible speaks of
this mission not only in its bearing on us
lost sinners, but also in its refl ection of
inner-Trinitarian commitments: by this
mission the Father determines that all
will honor the Son, even as they honor the
Father (see John 5:16-30): where does this
insistence fi t into crass language about
cosmic child abuse?

(3) In recent years there has been a
lot of chatter about various “models” of
the atonement that have appeared in the
history of the church: the penal substitution
model, the ''Christus Victor'' model,
the exemplary model, and so forth. The
impression is frequently given that today’s
Christians are free to pick and choose
among these so-called “models.” But
for any Christian committed to the fi nal
authority of Scripture, this approach is
''methodologically'' flawed. It allows historical
theology to trump Scripture. Surely
the right question to ask is this: Which,
if any, of these so-called “models” is
exegetically warranted by the Bible itself?
For instance, are there passages in which
biblical writers insist that Christ in his
death triumphed over the powers of darkness?
Are there passages in which Christ’s
self-sacrifice becomes a moral model for
his followers? Are there passages in which
Christ’s death is said to be a propitiation
for our sins, i.e., a sacrifice that turns away
the wrath of God? If the answer is “Yes”
to these three options—and there are
still more options I have not mentioned
here—then choosing only one of them
is being unfaithful to Scripture, for it is
too limiting. Christians are not at liberty
to pick and choose which of the Bible’s
teachings are to be treasured.

(4) There is another question that must
be asked when people talk about “models”
of the atonement. Assuming we can show
that several of them are warranted by
Scripture itself, the question to ask is this:
How, then, do these “models” cohere? Are
they merely discrete pearls on a string? Or
is there logic and intelligibility to them,
established by Scripture itself?

One recent work that loves to emphasize
the ''Christus Victor'' “model”—Christ
by his death is victor over sin and death—
somewhat begrudgingly concedes that
penal substitution is found in a few texts,
not least Rom 8:3. But this work expends
no effort to show how these two views
of the atonement should be integrated.
In other words, the work in question
denigrates penal substitution as a sort of
minor voice, puffs the preferred “model”
of ''Christus Victor'', and attempts no integration.
But I think it can be shown (though
it would take a very long chapter to do it)
that if one begins with the centrality of
penal substitution, which is, as we have
seen, grounded on a deep understanding
of how sin is an offense against God, it is
very easy to see how all the other so-called
“models” of the atonement are related to
it. The ''way'' Christ triumphs over sin and
death is by becoming a curse for us, by satisfying
the just demands of his heavenly
Father, thereby silencing the accuser, and
rising in triumph in resurrection splendor
because sin has done its worst and been
defeated by the One who bore its penalty.
Moreover, in the light of such immeasurable
love, there are inevitably exemplary
moral commitments that Christ’s followers
must undertake. In other words, it is
easy to show how various biblical emphases
regarding the atonement cohere if one
''begins'' with penal substitution. It is very
diffi cult to establish the coherence if one
begins anywhere else.

(5) At least some of the current work on
the atonement that is proving so scathing
of penal substitution refl ects discouraging
ignorance of earlier theological study
and reflection. Few interact any more
with standard works by J. I. Packer, John
Stott, and others—let alone classic works
produced by earlier generations. But a
new generation is rising, forcing readers
to take note that historic Christian confessionalism
will not roll over and play
dead. I heartily commend the recent book
by Steve Jeffery, Mike Ovey, and Andrew
Sach, ''Pierced for Our Transgressions: Rediscovering the Glory of Penal Substitution''
(InterVarsity, 2007)

'''Notes'''

<references />

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:32, 10 February 2010
Line 3:		Line 3:
	''Editor’s Note:'' Readers should be aware of the forum’s format. D. A. Carson,		''Editor’s Note:'' Readers should be aware of the forum’s format. D. A. Carson,
	Thomas R. Schreiner, Bruce A. Ware, and James Hamilton have been asked		Thomas R. Schreiner, Bruce A. Ware, and James Hamilton have been asked
-	~~specifi c~~ questions to which they have provided written responses. These writers are not	+	specific questions to which they have provided written responses. These writers are not
-	responding to one another. The journal’s goal for the Forum is to provide ~~signifi cant~~	+	responding to one another. The journal’s goal for the Forum is to provide significant
	thinkers’ views on topics of interest without requiring lengthy articles from these		thinkers’ views on topics of interest without requiring lengthy articles from these
	heavily-committed individuals. Their answers are presented in an order that hopefully		heavily-committed individuals. Their answers are presented in an order that hopefully
-	makes the forum read as much like a ~~unifi ed~~ presentation as possible.	+	makes the forum read as much like a unified presentation as possible.

	'''SBJT: What are some of the reasons why the doctrine of penal substitution is again coming under attack?'''		'''SBJT: What are some of the reasons why the doctrine of penal substitution is again coming under attack?'''
Line 75:		Line 75:
	The sermon warns the hearers not to follow		The sermon warns the hearers not to follow
	the broad road that leads to destruction,		the broad road that leads to destruction,
-	and pictures Jesus pronouncing ~~fi nal~~	+	and pictures Jesus pronouncing final
	judgment with the words, “I never knew		judgment with the words, “I never knew
	you. Away from me, you evildoers!” (7:23).		you. Away from me, you evildoers!” (7:23).
	The parables are replete with warnings of		The parables are replete with warnings of
-	~~fi nal~~ judgment; a ~~signifi cant~~ percentage	+	final judgment; a significant percentage
	of them demonstrate the essential divisiveness		of them demonstrate the essential divisiveness
	of the dawning of the kingdom.		of the dawning of the kingdom.
	Images of hell—outer darkness, furnace		Images of hell—outer darkness, furnace
-	of ~~fi re~~, weeping and gnashing of teeth,	+	of fire, weeping and gnashing of teeth,
	undying worms, eternal fire—are too		undying worms, eternal fire—are too
	ghastly to contemplate long. After Jesus’		ghastly to contemplate long. After Jesus’
Line 90:		Line 90:
	his hearers that Jesus is the promised		his hearers that Jesus is the promised
	Messiah, that his death and resurrection		Messiah, that his death and resurrection
-	are the ~~fulfi llment~~ of Scripture, and that	+	are the fulfillment of Scripture, and that
	God “has made this Jesus, whom you		God “has made this Jesus, whom you
-	~~crucifi ed~~ [he tells them], both Lord and	+	crucified [he tells them], both Lord and
	Christ” (Acts 2:36). That is every bit as		Christ” (Acts 2:36). That is every bit as
	much threat as promise: the hearers are		much threat as promise: the hearers are
Line 100:		Line 100:
	preaches to Cornelius and his household,		preaches to Cornelius and his household,
	the climax of his moving address is that		the climax of his moving address is that
-	in ~~fulfi llment~~ of Scripture God appointed	+	in fulfillment of Scripture God appointed
	Jesus “as judge of the living and the		Jesus “as judge of the living and the
	dead”—and thus not of Jews only. Those		dead”—and thus not of Jews only. Those
Line 128:		Line 128:
	themes are an irreducible part of faithful		themes are an irreducible part of faithful
	gospel preaching. Small wonder, then,		gospel preaching. Small wonder, then,
-	that Felix was ~~terrifi ed~~ (24:25). The Letter	+	that Felix was terrified (24:25). The Letter
	to the Romans, which many rightly take		to the Romans, which many rightly take
	to be, at very least, a core summary of the		to be, at very least, a core summary of the
	apostle’s understanding of the gospel,		apostle’s understanding of the gospel,
-	~~fi nds~~ Paul insisting that judgment takes	+	finds Paul insisting that judgment takes
	place “on the day when God will judge		place “on the day when God will judge
	men’s secrets through Jesus Christ, ''as my gospel declares''” (Rom 2:16). Writing to the		men’s secrets through Jesus Christ, ''as my gospel declares''” (Rom 2:16). Writing to the
Line 138:		Line 138:
	“rescues us from the coming wrath” (1		“rescues us from the coming wrath” (1
	Thess 1:10). This Jesus will be “revealed		Thess 1:10). This Jesus will be “revealed
-	from heaven in blazing ~~fi re~~ with his powerful	+	from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful
	angels. He will punish those who do		angels. He will punish those who do
	not know God and do not obey the ''gospel''		not know God and do not obey the ''gospel''
Line 145:		Line 145:
	from the presence of the Lord and from		from the presence of the Lord and from
	the majesty of his power on the day he		the majesty of his power on the day he
-	comes to be ~~glorifi ed~~ in his holy people	+	comes to be glorified in his holy people
	and to be marveled at among all those		and to be marveled at among all those
	who have believed” (2 Thess 1:7-10). We		who have believed” (2 Thess 1:7-10). We
Line 153:		Line 153:
	is the destiny of destruction. “Like the		is the destiny of destruction. “Like the
	rest, we were by nature objects of wrath”		rest, we were by nature objects of wrath”
-	(Eph 2:3), for we ~~gratifi ed~~ “the cravings of	+	(Eph 2:3), for we gratified “the cravings of
	our sinful nature . . . following its desires		our sinful nature . . . following its desires
	and thoughts” (2:3)—but now we have		and thoughts” (2:3)—but now we have
Line 173:		Line 173:
	in which we now stand” (5:1-2).		in which we now stand” (5:1-2).

-	Time and space fail to allow ~~refl ection~~	+	Time and space fail to allow reflection
-	on how the ~~sacrifi ce~~ of Christ in the Letter	+	on how the sacrifice of Christ in the Letter
	to the Hebrews is what alone enables		to the Hebrews is what alone enables
	us to escape the terror of those who fall		us to escape the terror of those who fall
	into the hands of the living God, who is a		into the hands of the living God, who is a
-	consuming ~~fi re~~, or on how the Apocalypse	+	consuming fire, or on how the Apocalypse
-	presents the Lamb as the slaughtered ~~sacrifi~~	+	presents the Lamb as the slaughtered sacrifice, even while warning of the danger of
-	ce, even while warning of the danger of	+
	falling under the wrath of the Lamb.		falling under the wrath of the Lamb.

Line 186:		Line 185:
	death, judgment—is what stands behind		death, judgment—is what stands behind
	the simple words of, say, 1 Cor 15:3: as a		the simple words of, say, 1 Cor 15:3: as a
-	matter of ~~fi rst~~ importance, Paul tells us,	+	matter of first importance, Paul tells us,
	“Christ died for our sins.” Parallel texts		“Christ died for our sins.” Parallel texts
	instantly leap to mind: “[Christ] was		instantly leap to mind: “[Christ] was
	delivered over to death for our sins, and		delivered over to death for our sins, and
-	was raised to life for our ~~justifi cation”~~	+	was raised to life for our justification”
	(Rom 4:25). “Christ died for the ungodly”		(Rom 4:25). “Christ died for the ungodly”
	(Rom 5:6). The Lord Jesus Christ “gave		(Rom 5:6). The Lord Jesus Christ “gave
Line 243:		Line 242:
	on the tree. Moreover, the Bible speaks of		on the tree. Moreover, the Bible speaks of
	this mission not only in its bearing on us		this mission not only in its bearing on us
-	lost sinners, but also in its ~~refl ection~~ of	+	lost sinners, but also in its reflection of
	inner-Trinitarian commitments: by this		inner-Trinitarian commitments: by this
	mission the Father determines that all		mission the Father determines that all
	will honor the Son, even as they honor the		will honor the Son, even as they honor the
	Father (see John 5:16-30): where does this		Father (see John 5:16-30): where does this
-	insistence ~~fi t~~ into crass language about	+	insistence fit into crass language about
	cosmic child abuse?		cosmic child abuse?

Line 260:		Line 259:
	Christians are free to pick and choose		Christians are free to pick and choose
	among these so-called “models.” But		among these so-called “models.” But
-	for any Christian committed to the ~~fi nal~~	+	for any Christian committed to the final
	authority of Scripture, this approach is		authority of Scripture, this approach is
	''methodologically'' flawed. It allows historical		''methodologically'' flawed. It allows historical
Line 328:		Line 327:
	regarding the atonement cohere if one		regarding the atonement cohere if one
	''begins'' with penal substitution. It is very		''begins'' with penal substitution. It is very
-	~~diffi cult~~ to establish the coherence if one	+	difficult to establish the coherence if one
	begins anywhere else.		begins anywhere else.

	(5) At least some of the current work on		(5) At least some of the current work on
	the atonement that is proving so scathing		the atonement that is proving so scathing
-	of penal substitution ~~refl ects~~ discouraging	+	of penal substitution reflects discouraging
	ignorance of earlier theological study		ignorance of earlier theological study
	and reflection. Few interact any more		and reflection. Few interact any more