A Discussion On The Atonement

This is an excerpt from a discussion I am having with a friend about penal substitutionary atonement.

You completely missed the point. You admitted to accepting anyone's confession. Yet when you recieve them, you are thinking the words mean what you have defined them to mean. A Mormon or JW would tell you exactly what you wanted to hear, and if you knew not their background or semantics, you would put your arm around them and call them brother. Isn't that what Promise Keepers does? Yet, all the while, they are still in their sin, believing a perverted gospel that is no gospel at all...but it was good enough for you. Get my point? CONTEND for the faith.

If anyone claims to be a believer and that is the extent of the knowledge that I have to go on, then I take them at their word. However, if they are not believers then time will certainly tell. They may bear no fruit or speak theology that suggests they may not be in a saving relationship with God. Yes, a Mormon or Jew might tell me exactly what I want to hear but so will a Southern Baptist. But any Southern Baptist who tells me that they are a believer I accept that confession. But if their fruit or theology leads me to suspect they are not saved then I will question their salvation as sure as I would anyone else. I would expect others to do the same for me.

I have know Southern Baptist, adult members of churches, who had very good theological beliefs but their life did not bear fruit but soon they realized they were not saved (they thought they were) and repented and came to God.

I have known Mormons who grew up in the religion and had a conversion experience which led them to a saving relationship with God through Christ. They remained attached to the Mormon church for a few years before God finally led them out of that community and to a more orthodox tradition.

I know of Jews who are followers of Jesus. They believe He is the Messiah, Son of God and no one can come to the Father except through Him. They hold an orthodox faith. However, they do not refer to themselves as “Christians”. They call themselves “followers of Jesus”. They do so because the term “Christian” is such a loaded word among Jews that they are able to more effectively witness, convert and disciple under the moniker “follow of Jesus”.

I always think words mean what I think they mean or what they are generally meant by a particular group that uses those words. That’s the point of words.

Someone who confesses Christ to me does not have to prove to me that they are sincere in that confession. They only have to prove otherwise, which those who are not truly believers will do with time.

I really do not know anything about Promise Keepers.

On missions, you made the point earlier that man didn't have to know Christ to be saved. -->

"I think God can save without people ever having ever heard of Jesus Christ. However, no one can hear of Jesus Christ, reject Him, and then be saved."

IT sounds as if people may have a better chance if they don't hear of Him, then they can't "reject" Him. Many, many communities hear of Him and reject Him. However, they already had rejected Him. You state "more easily accept Him." That is most interesting.

No, people have a better chance if they do hear Him than if they do not. Jesus presents the Father, God, more than anything else. They can have the prophets (Scripture) and the prophets (Scripture) will lead them to God but not as effectively as Christ. The Prophets wrote and spoke the Word but they were not the Word. Jesus didn’t simply speak the Word, He enacted the Word. He is the Word. He is perfect representation of God, the Son who testifies the Father (John 5:37; 8:28; 12:49; 14:9; 15:5; 16:25)

Again, no one who has faith in the Father will reject the Son. No one who has faith in the Son rejects the Father. Those who reject the Son have rejected the Father. Those who have faith in the Father before the have knowledge of the Son, will accept the Son because they accept the Father. (John 15:24; 16:3)

The ancients (both Jews and non-Jews) were able to be saved by God even though they lived and died before the incarnation of Christ and before ever having any knowledge of Jesus.

Since the incarnation of Christ, the ministry of Jesus and the inauguration of the kingdom and the Church, the spread of the gospel has tremendously escalated the salvation of the world. That was what so amazed the Jewish Christians: “God has given to the Gentiles repentance that leads to life” (Acts 11:18). Of course, God had always given the Gentiles and the Jews such repentance (see Jonah). Several reasons for this:

1) Jesus proclaims the Father in a way that no one else can

2) Satan has fallen and has been bound to a greater extent than ever before allowing the Gospel to be preached to Gentiles like never before. This has occurred because of Jesus and the gospel message of the kingdom of God.

3) Believers are now empowered by the Holy Spirit in a way that they have never have been before. The Spirit of God used to come and go on prophets and such. With Jesus, the Spirit rested upon Him and remained. Because we as believers are a part of the body of Christ, we partake of the Spirit through our identification with Christ. The Spirit gives us knowledge, power and authority to further the kingdom. Most importantly, the Spirit of God testifies of Christ. The Spirit points to Christ. The Spirit of God points to Christ because the Spirit of God is the Spirit of Jesus. Thus the Spirit brings people to salvation to God like never before because it points to Christ who is the means of salvation.

Let me ask you this, you can answer to yourself: can God forgive someone who commits "blasphemy against the Spirit" (Matt 12:31). If not, why not? Can He not do anything? IF so, why the decree? God has ordained that this be the case. He decided in eternity past that this sin would not be forgiven, and was pleased to restrict Himself to this decree. He chose to set this standard, and must abide by it, because otherwise it would be imperfect. God was also pleased to ordain that belief in and confession of Jesus Christ is the means by which a person is saved. Yet, you don't think this is fair? Is it not fair if one never hears of Christ and dies and goes to hell? Did not God decree that this was His means of salvation? Did not Jesus Himself declare that if you do not have Him, you don't even have the Father, rendering all Jews (Judaism) and Muslims godless to this day?


See above. Jesus has not always been incarnated and those who lived before Jesus were still saved. How were they saved without knowledge of Christ? The answer is that Christ has a corporate nature and men are redeemed when they are identified with Christ. God directly saves Christ, men are indirectly saved by God when they are connected to Christ. This is why Christ is the means by which man is saved. It is Christ’s perfect love and devotion to God that He recognizes and rewards. All believers in God are then a part of Christ’s body. This includes all those believers since Christ who have knowledge of Christ and accept Him and those believers before Christ who did not reject Him because they did not ever know of Him. However, every believer who lived before Christ would have accepted Christ if given that knowledge. Abraham, Moses, Elijah, David would have accepted Christ because they believed in God.

“Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.” (John14:7)

The disciples already believe in God, now they are learning to believe in Jesus.

“If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.” (John14:7)

A believer in God will recognize Jesus as such; a non-believer will not. A believer in God when confronted with Christ will see in His words, His works and in His person that He is of God. Anyone confronted by Christ who rejects Him also rejects God and was never a believer to begin with (John 5:23; 8:19, 42; 10:30, 37-38).

You referenced the sin of “blasphemy against the Spirit" (Matt 12:31). What is that sin? In this passage it is attributing to the Satan the work of the Holy Spirit. They can mischaracterize the Son of Man (Jesus), but to mischaracterize the Spirit (the Spirit of God, the Spirit of Jesus as the Christ, the one anointed by the Spirit) is ultimately unforgivable. By rejecting the work of Christ, one is blaspheming the Holy Spirit which is doing the work of God, thus one is rejecting the Spirit of God and thus rejecting God.

No one can come to God except by Jesus Christ. No one. There is no other way. However, this way can be either conscious or unconscious on the part of the believer in God. Before one has knowledge of Christ they are unconscious of this connection. After they have knowledge of Christ they are conscious. Let me give you an example that might help: conservative evangelical Christians believe that a fetus or infant is a person and loved by God. We also believe that a fetus or infant that dies (either by abortion or accident) will be saved by God, even though that child never has conscious knowledge of Christ. This is similar to the situation of those who accepted God prior to the incarnation.

Perhaps you do not understand my use of terminology. When I say “believer in God” I am not referring to intellectual assent to the idea that God exists or that “Christ saves”. By “believer in God” I refer to the Scriptural of “belief” that refers to “trust”, “love” and “saving faith” in God. Jews, Muslims and pagans who intellectually believe that God exists but reject Christ do not “believe in God” and are not “believers”.

On penal substitutionary atonement, circ, you have formulated three points that have no Scriptural basis. They are all ideas you yourself generated.

These are not my ideas. These are ideas found in Scripture because they are taught by Scripture. They certainly are not ideas I discovered in Scripture. They’ve been taught for hundreds and thousands of years. Believe me: penal substitutionary atonement as it is espoused by Southern Baptists and other evangelicals only goes back to Calvin. His was a modified version of Aquinas, The Roman Catholics generally hold to penal substitutionary atonement (like Mel Gibson) as taught by Aquinas. Aquinas developed his view from Anselm’s Satisfaction Theory. This Anselm view is the one which most closely resembles mine, though I make modifications of it here and there to more conform to Scripture. Believe me: my view is very conservative and orthodox. It is older than penal substitutionary atonement by several hundred years. Liberals and most moderates completely reject my view as being too medieval and barbaric. They suggest that the idea that God’s wrath had to be abated is nonsense. I think there wrong but I do agree with them that Christ was not receiving any punishment on the cross. Of course, for me, the atonement of Christ began at his entry into the world at conception and ended on the cross: His whole life was the atonement.

Knowledge puffs up, and is dangerous unchecked.

1 Corinthians 8:1

I’ve checked all my knowledge by Scripture. I have done so because all of this knowledge comes from Scripture. I hold to these beliefs because I believe it is taught in Scripture.

Look at this next verse:

“And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.” (1 Corinthians 8:1)

This verse is the basis for my entire understanding of attaining knowledge. One begins to learn and gain knowledge when one admits he doesn’t know anything, when one admits he is ignorant. When one becomes humble and seeks God to remove pride and fears God education can begin and one can achieve knowledge.

“The fear of the LORD [is] the beginning of knowledge” (Prov 1:7)

This same idea is expressed in the thoughts of Socrates and Nicholaus of Cusa.
Pride is the enemy of knowledge. All sin comes from pride and those with pride can never truly learn.

These views are the result of my pursuit of humility.

That sacrifices do not receive punishment- this is terribly shortsighted! The very death of the animal is punishment! Why? For sin of man- that deserved death. But did man receive the punishment of death? No! the animal did.

Man does receive the punishment of death for his sin (see Genesis 3). The reward for faith is resurrection, typified by and thru Jesus Christ.

The animals receive punishment? Animals do not sin and can not gain eternal life. There death means nothing to God because it eventually dies anyway and remains dead. No, the purpose of a sacrificial offering is not punishment for the sinner but the devotion of the sinner who comes to God in repentance and love. And not all sacrifices have to be because of sin; they can be simply an expression of thanks. Hence, the Thanksgiving offering. For example, Noah, having left the ark and being thankful to God,

“took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.” (Gen 8:20)

Now look at God’s response:

“And the LORD smelled a sweet savor; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart [is] evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.” (Gen 8:21)

The “Lord smelled the sweet savor” is representative of His being pleased of Noah’s thanks. Noah was not offering a sacrifice because he had sinned but because he was thankful.

This idea is given by Paul in Ephesians:

“And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savor.” (Eph 5:2; see this same idea conveyed by Paul in 2 Cor 2:15 and Phl 4:18)

This is why sacrificial offerings are pointless without love and devotion to God (1 Sam 1:11-20; Is 1:11-20; Mic 6:8; Mar 12:33).

This is why Paul tells us to offer our bodies up as living sacrifices (Rom 12:1; see also Pet 2:5).

That is why grain and other non-living things can be offered up as a sacrifice (Lev 2; 1 Kings 4:22; Judges 6:17-24).

This is why we are called to make the same sacrifice as Jesus Christ (however imperfect it may be), by denying ourselves (Matt 10:38; 16:24; Mar 8:34; 10:21; Lk 14:27; Phl 2:8). The cross is not about receiving punishment for sins but showing love and obedience to God and denying one’s self unto death. Because those who are obedient unto death are given life.


This is why Paul talks about being crucified in Christ:

“I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.” (Gal 2:20)

“Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with [him], that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin … Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him” (Rom 6:6, 8).

We are crucified with and in Christ. We are not receiving a punishment with Christ. We are a part of Christ’s self-giving devotional love to God. God rewards Christ for this devotion and raises Him up and us with Him. It is a pleasing aroma to God, a sweet savoring smell.

Again, animal sacrifice is not about punishing an animal to remove guilt from the sinner. The sinner is still guilty, just forgiven. He’s forgiven not because something else receives the punishment but because the sinner has shown his repentance by sacrificing, by offering, by destroying something that is of worth. This is why different classes with different incomes were required to sacrifice different animals of different values. The rich would sacrifice oxen and bulls, the poor would sacrifice doves and such. Those in the middle would sacrifice sheep. If it were all about punishment then it wouldn’t matter what worth of animal it was; it was still be punished. This is why the animal was not simply killed but completely burnt up so it could not be then used. The point was that the person had given something up in devotion to God. This is why it was not simply good enough to simply kill the animal in the sacrifice, the person making the sacrifice had to have his heart right (Is 1:11-20; Mic 6:8; Mar 12:33). If it were all about punishment then it would not matter if the person’s heart was right or not.


If sin does not have to be met with judgement b/c God is righteous, then what is the basis for hell?

All sin deserves punishment. Unrepentant sin is met with judgment. Those who sin but repent avoid punishment (see Jonah 3). That’s grace; it’s the running theme of the Bible. The prodigal son repented and was not punished, much to the elder brother’s disdain (see a similar reaction by Jonah to Nineveh’s repentance in Jonah 3-4). If repenting sinners were met with punishment then no one could be saved.

By your definition, rejecting Christ would deserve punishment- and that's the only sin worhty of punishment. Therefore, now I see why you think men can escape judgment if they never reject Christ, yet never confess Him.

See above. See the Old Testament.

On your book, isn't that a bit arrogant? That your journey will be helpful? What if it is harmful? Don't you fear God enough to let Him work through students rather than view yourself as some kind of "vehicle" to transmit to them the "real" truth?

Why would it be arrogant to want to write a book that people would find helpful? Why would it be harmful? It’s true. It’s in Scripture. I can point to it. I can prove it. These views have not hurt me. Quite the opposite. My spiritual life, discipleship, Christ-likeness, and closeness to God have grown and improved because of these views. Now I am not saying anyone who adopts my views will grow spiritually (certainly there are many who hold me views and are not spiritually healthy) and I am certainly not saying that anyone who doesn’t believe as I do won’t grow spiritually (there are fundamentalists I know with Christ-likeness I may never have). But, in my case, these beliefs have helped me and I want to help others. I am God’s servant just as you are. We would be in serious trouble if God was not using us to help others. All believers are called by God to proclaim the gospel and make disciples. That is the purpose of our being elected. That is what I am doing. To not tell people what I have been taught by God and have experienced in my relationship with Him would be to hide it under a bushel.