A Couple Difficult Verses Matthew 12:32; 26:24

[1824]

Of course, this line of reasoning does not agree with the character of God revealed in scripture, the God who does not repay a person according to his sins, the God of mercy and grace. That line of reasoning comes from the Fuedal system that was common in the Dark ages where to sin against the king or the baron (land owner) was to incur a greater penalty because of who the king/baron was.

This is not at all the revelation of the character of God I see in scripture. He is our Father, He is love and love is not easily offended. Love (and a good father) is quick to forgive, covers sins, doesn’t get upset with mistakes but in love deals with punishes wrong practices with a goal of bringing positive change to his child. Wise loving parenting includes reality discipline, allowing some of the child’s bad choices to cause them pain, though that pain be mitigated by the grace and love of the parent.

I agree that this is the character of God. God is Love. Thus he acts lovingly to all of His creatures. Out of His love for us he has made provision, by his Son. It is through Jesus Christ that we have the forgiveness of sins. I am coming to agree as well that such forgiveness will be extended to all mankind.

However, when you say, “the God who does not repay a person according to his sins” I cannot mesh this with passages that teach that God takes vengeance on his adversaries, repaying them according to their evil, like the following:

Psalm 94:1-2, 23:

O Lord, God of vengeance, O God of vengeance, shine forth! Rise up, O judge of the earth; repay to the proud what they deserve!
23. He will bring back on them their iniquity and wipe them out for their wickedness; the Lord our God will wipe them out.

Duet 32:35, 43:

Vengeance is mine, and recompense, for the time when their foot shall slip; for the day of their calamity is at hand,

Rejoice with him, O heavens; bow down to him, all gods, for he avenges the blood of his children and takes vengeance on his adversaries. He repays those who hate him and cleanses his people’s land.

2 Kings 9:7 -

And you shall strike down the house of Ahab your master, so that I may avenge on Jezebel the blood of my servants the prophets, and the blood of all the servants of the Lord.

Joel 3:19-21

“Egypt shall become a desolation and Edom a desolate wilderness, for the violence done to the people of Judah, because they have shed innocent blood in their land. But Judah shall be inhabited forever, and Jerusalem to all generations. I will avenge their blood, blood I have not avenged, for the Lord dwells in Zion.”

Why does not God take out his vengeance on us eternally? Because he has taken all our trespasses and the debt associated with them and has nailed them to the cross of Christ:

Colossians 2:13,14

And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, 14 by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross

…sounds like penal substitution to me.

I do intend to begin a thread soon to hash out with y’all why I still believe in penal substitution and the satisfaction theory of atonement which apparently isn’t very popular here.

[Sobornost]

Hi 1824

I’m not actually sure that PSA isn’t popular on this site as such – certainly PSA framed in terms of limited atonement isn’t because this is a Universalist site – and it is PSA limited atonement that people here find incredible in particular (and non-biblical too). However, there are people that believe in universal PSA here (and as far as I know some key people on this site may hold to this view).

I’m not sure PSA goes to the heart to the matter with the texts discussed on this thread – but if you are seeing PSA in Universalist terms that is wonderful and that actually accords with what your heart is telling you anyway - so you are moving on from being at odds with yourself. I’m overjoyed at this – for your sake. But I look forward to reading your thread on PSA.

One of the great strengths of this site is that it is non-sectarian and truly ecumenical. I think from the perspective of the wider Church, PSA (expressed in a sensitive rather than a crude form) is a true witness to the Gospel. However, we are aware that the theory – like other theories of atonement – is dependent on a certain selection of texts (which at times are de-contextualised); and that from the times of the very Early Church Christians have held to other theories of the atonement; and PSA is unknown in the ancient Church of the East. I know there are PSA sites with quotations from some of the Church Fathers that seemingly uphold PSA – but the best scholarship I’ve read (the stuff that actually looks at these quotations in context) suggests to me that Irenaeus, Ambrose, Augustine etc, did not actually advocate classic PSA theory – indeed they didn’t know of it. There is a thread somewhere on this site where someone claims that Augustine was a PSA man – and then someone who has recently made a close study of Augustine joins in and demolishes this claim with chapter and verse.

The ecumenical position is that there are various theories of atonement – all glimpse and express a part of the truth, and we need to open to the greater truth beyond the theories. Jason is very good at taking on board different theories of atonement with sensitivity and empathy – I’m sure he’ll have stuff to say when you start your thread.
I’m also aware that there are different ways of expressing PSA theory – some that people on this thread will find easier to empathise with than others (that includes the difference between limited atonement PSA, hypothetical universalism PSA, and actual universalism PSA, but there are other differing emphases to I understand)

Blessings

Dick

[Sobornost]

Ooops Nimblewell has already started the thread Check it out - and also check out not only the video but many of the comments to the video which are actually pro-PSA.