Penal Substitutionary Atonement - A Defense
While textual issues are my favorite thing to write about in the realm of apologetics, I cannot confine my research to one particular field while ignoring the rest, so I’ve decided to interrupt my stream of articles on translations, transmission, and manuscripts, and give some attention to a very important subject that is at the heart of the Christian faith: The Atonement. A particular doctrine has come under heavy attack by “progressive Christianity,” and, while not a novel critique, it has recently entered the crosshairs of well-known figures such as Brian Zahnd, Greg Boyd, and Steve Chalke. The doctrine of which I speak is the doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement, or P.S.A for short. However, as usual, before I can present a defense, we must define what exactly we are talking about here.
I found it helpful when I first began studying this doctrine to break it down word by word, so we’ll start there.
Penal - having to do with a penalty, or punishment due as a necessary consequence of one’s wrongdoing.
Substitutionary - done in such a way as to act in another’s stead.
Atonement - This word is more complex than it may seem on the surface, for there are two main ideas that are referenced using this one word in the way it is used in P.S.A.: Reparation and Expiation. When you hear the word “reparation,” you may think of the word “repair,” and that is the end-goal of atonement: to repair the relationship between God and His creation which was broken and damaged by human sin and rebellion. This is what most people think of nowadays when they hear the word “atonement.” But something must be done in order for this to take place. Sinners must be cleansed in order to have a renewed right standing before God, and that brings us to “expiation.”
To expiate, is to cleanse or purge; in the case of the atonement, this means to cleanse of sin those who are washed by the blood of Christ. Think of these two words this way; The end result is sinners being restored to a right relationship with God, this would be “reparation.” But how is this accomplished? Expiation is the side of the atonement that explains the “How?” How does Jesus’s death on a Roman cross make someone right with God? Well, it cleanses you of the very sin that separates you from God, for Jesus took the penalty of your sin (Penal) on Himself (Substitutionary) and thereby paid your debt and cleansed you of your sins (Expiation: Atonement) resulting in your restored relationship with God (Reparation: Atonement). Here is another definition from someone much smarter than I am.
“The doctrine of penal substitution states that God gave Himself in the Person of His Son to suffer instead of us the death, punishment, and curse due to fallen humanity as the penalty for our sin.” This is a quote from the book Pierced For Our Transgressions which I have recommended at the end of this article, that summarizes the doctrine well, although there is so much more to be said on the topic of the atonement. In fact, my biggest struggle in writing most of these articles is giving a short, yet thorough explanation and defense of subjects which people have literally written full books about. In any case, with the definitions and vocabulary lesson out of the way, let’s look at why people are attacking this doctrine.
I will be focusing for the rest of this piece on some of the points made in the opening statement of Brian Zahnd in his “Monster God Debate,” in which he argues against Dr. Michael Brown on the subject P.S.A. (There will have to be more articles written on this subject, as Brian crammed a whole lot of rhetoric in a short 15 minute opening statement).
Brian begins by setting up a strawman of P.S.A. Listen to what he says in this quote: “Particularly abhorrent is the penal substitutionary atonement theory, that turns the Father of Jesus into a pagan deity who can only be placated by the barbarism of child sacrifice.” This is not the doctrine of penal substitution. Brian will go on to suggest that P.S.A paints God as an angry pagan deity who cannot control His anger or His bloodthirst and must vent His petty wrath upon an innocent person in order to satisfy His vindictive needs. Brian’s false rendition of P.S.A makes God sound like a toddler with a temper tantrum, and makes Jesus seem like He was never supposed to die in our place, even though Isaiah 53:10 says that it was the will of God to crush Him. This, I believe, is rooted in his misunderstanding of the wrath of God. God’s wrath is good, and perfectly consistent with His holy nature. His wrath is not a result of an uncontrollable anger management problem, as Brian makes it seem, but is a result of God’s just character. God’s justice requires that evil deeds be punished, and doers of evil receive the due penalty for their actions. If a judge said in open court, “You know, you raped and killed three women, but I am just going to forgive you. You don’t have to pay for what you did.” no one would call that judge “just.” One may even call that judge “wicked.”
The analogy has been made, “When a bank forgives a debt, they don’t say to the debtor, ‘We will forgive you when you have paid your debt,’ or, ‘When someone else comes along to pay your debt, the bank will forgive you,’ they just forgive the debt! It is not paid back in order for the debtor to be forgiven.” This may seem like a powerful objection on the surface, but what actually happens when a bank forgives someone’s debt? That bank is still out all of that money, and the bank has to eat that cost itself. In other words, that bank took the debt on itself in order to forgive the debtor and the impact of that debt does not just magically disappear. In a sense, the bank takes the debt upon itself. Sounds familiar. Penal Substitution states that it was God Himself who paid our debt, so this objection actually supports P.S.A in a way.
Now, if you’re like me, you might be thinking, “You know what? This is interesting and all, but I want to know what scripture says about a subject, not just analogies and human understanding.” If that is you (and I think it should be), then you’ll want to pay close attention to the latter part of this article. We are now going to look at a well known event in Exodus to see what scripture says concerning atonement, and what it says happened on the cross.
Why begin with the Old Testament? 1 Corinthians 15:3 says “For I passed on to you as of first importance what I also received—that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures.” So in whatever way Christ died for our sins, it was according to the scriptures, and I dare say that it would be impossible for someone to deny that “the scriptures,” here is referring to the Old Testament. John 5:46 says, “ If you believed Moses, you would believe me, because he wrote about me.”
The Passover is one of the most important events in the OT: It takes place in preparation before the final plague in Egypt before the exodus. Why this specific passage? Because it contains something called typology, which is used in scripture in order to shadow, or symbolize Christ. This verse, 1 Corinthians 5:7 displays the passover lamb as a “type” of Christ: a symbol, or shadow of Him. Read what it says: “Clean out the old yeast so that you may be a new batch of dough—you are, in fact, without yeast. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.” According to this verse, the Passover lamb symbolizes Christ in His sacrifice.
First, the context of the Passover is that the descendants of Abraham were enslaved in the wicked and idolatrous land of Egypt, and God is getting ready to finally deliver them from their bondage. God is going to slay all of the firstborn in the land of Egypt as judgement, and when this happens, Pharaoh finally agrees to release the people. The Passover lamb is to protect Israel from this final plague. Let’s look at the passage in Exodus 12:13: “The blood will be a sign for you on the houses where you are, so that when I see the blood I will pass over you, and this plague will not fall on you to destroy you when I attack the land of Egypt.” Now think about this for a second; God did not need the Passover lamb to deliver Israel. Let me explain; God could have just slayed the firstborn of the Egyptians and Pharaoh would have released His people. Why did the Jews need the blood of the lamb in order for the plague not to fall on them? Because when God said in Exodus 6, “'‘Therefore, tell the Israelites, ‘I am the Lord. I will bring you out from your enslavement to the Egyptians, I will rescue you from the hard labor they impose, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great judgments.’” this final plague was not just a judgement on Egypt, it was a judgement on sinners period. The Jews were not sinless, and therefore were deserving of judgement as the Egyptians were. God could have just said, “Descendants of Abraham, you are repentant unlike the Egyptians, and so I will just strike Egypt and we’ll pretend that your sins never happened.” No. Their sins had to be judged as well. The lamb was the Israelites’ substitute.
Now take this alongside Jesus’s sacrifice. If the lamb took their penalty in the old testament, then Christ took our penalty in the New. To keep this article short, I will conclude with one more passage that seems to make the doctrine of P.S.A painfully obvious:
Romans 3:25-26:
God publicly displayed him at his death as the mercy seat accessible through faith. This was to demonstrate his righteousness, because God in his forbearance had passed over the sins previously committed. This was also to demonstrate his righteousness in the present time, so that he would be just and the justifier of the one who lives because of Jesus’ faithfulness.” So it wasn’t for divine forgiveness that God passed over sin; It was because of divine forbearance.God would eventually judge sin on the cross. He did not simply “forgive and forget,” the sin and rebellion of His creation; God laid on Jesus Christ our punishment on the cross, because God is just, and we are justified by Christ. The just Judge of the world does not leave evil unpunished, but being the loving Father that He is, He sent His Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
Recommended Resources:
Book: Pierced For Our Transgressions by Andrew Sach, Mike Ovey, and Steve Jeffery
Videos:
Answering Objections to the Atonement with Dr. William Lane Craig
(by Capturing Christianity)
(Playlist: 5 videos!) PSA Defended: Scripture, History, Philosophy, and Rhetoric
(by Mike Winger)