The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Flaws with penal substitution/satisfaction theory


This looks interesting too: … ement.html. Unfortunately the author has left the faith, but that doesn’t mean his arguments against PS aren’t sound. I’d like to hear your thoughts on his arguments.



qaz, I think it’s neat that you are wrestling with these great traditional questions. I think that’s the process by which many of us come to views that we are more convincingly at peace with. Blessings in your quest.

Of course, I like this article since it reflects the kind of perspective I’ve offered :wink: What can you expect from someone like me who presents two pages of reasons why he thinks penal substitution is a non-starter.



The verses describing Jesus as freely forgiving people during his ministry offer prima facie evidence that people could be forgiven without punishment, but what if the real reason they could be forgiven was because Jesus knew he was the “lamb slain from the foundation of the world”? (Rev. 13:8) That is, whether or not Jesus had died yet was irrelevant; it was purposed by God and going to happen in time eventually. Apparently that argument is made in Charles Ryrie’s book, So Great A Salvation.



What do you guys think of the idea that Jesus only seemingly forgave freely, and that his forgiveness was only made possible because he knew he would be punished to cover the sins of the recipients of his mercy?