"No" to Wrath and "Yes" to Love


We like to see the bad guy lose - punished for his wrongdoing, perhaps even far beyond the extent of his crime. Is this the way God sees things too and is He constrained by the eye for eye law?

“No” to Wrath and “Yes” to Love


I too reject Penal Substitution: I don’t think God took out His anger on Jesus instead of taking it out on us.

Then what did happen at the cross, and why? I would argue that there is a devil, who is a legalistic accuser, and (in contradistinction to Greg Albrecht) that it was he who poured wrath on Jesus at the cross, not humanity.

Here is what I shared with Qaz about this in March, on another thread:


Thank you for your reply and link to your post. I haven’t decided which atonement theory (or combination) makes sense to me, but I have definitely rejected PSA because the picture it paints of God is quite simply horrific.


Dan Barker preached as an evangelical minister for19 years and then rejected Christianity altogether.
However the following video in which Dan gives his “basement parable” is a great illustration of the preposterous penal substitution theory:


Yes, sadly penal substitutionary atonement is a great recruiting sergeant for atheism. Thanks for the video.


Hermano, I agree with you on this. However, to me, the serpent represents a man who thinks he is God and makes his own rules. Men like this are the ones who killed Jesus. And yes, God’s wrath, punishment, disciplinary action, execution of justice ( call it what you want it’s all the same to me) does come upon men such as these. God’s grace period only lasts for so long before this judgment comes, and we never know when that is.


Interesting. Do you have any more about the “serpent represents a man who thinks he is God and makes his own rules” eg. some articles or books along those lines?


mcarans, In response to your question, there may be books or articles out there. I don’t really know. But, this is the impression I get about the serpent in reading just the books of the Bible. They seem to be referring to corrupt men who seek power and wealth for themselves.