Justice, Wrath, and Propitiation

[Don Sailer] The Bible refers to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by using personal pronouns.

And so do modalists.

[Don Sailer] I can find passages in the OT that demonstrate that YHWH is the Father, others that YHWH is the Son, and still others that show that YHWH is the Spirit.

All of which a modalist could affirm.

[Greg Long]

[Don Sailer]

[Jeff Straub]

It is curious that the part of Ps 22 Jesus chooses to quote is the first verse. I am glad for you to explain to me why the Gospel writers have included the Aramaic text. So how do you know why they are doing it? Your explanation misses the obvious … he quoted what he identified with—fully and completely.

No one who holds the penal substitution argues that Jesus was finally and fully forsaken by the Father. But for a moment in TIME, the fellowship that the Triune God knew from eternity passed, was somehow inextricably fractured. The Father turned his face from the Son as he hung bearing the sin and then turned back to the Son accepting the sacrifice made not utterly forsaking him.

Your explanation of Jesus’ use of the forsaking text is simply to ignore the text proper as if the words have no meaning. Jesus chose this phrase among seven to tells us about what transpired on the cross. You have simply ignored what he said because it does not comport with your view.

Jesus must have had a particular reason for quoting those words beyond simply saying “I am the fulfillment of Ps 22, but not THESE words. They actually are meaningless in my case!”

Jeff, if Jesus on the cross wanted to bring to mind the whole of Psalm 22 to those present, especially the Pharisees, how would he do that?

Would he not quote the first line of the Psalm?

I think it Jesus wanted to bring any Scripture to someone’s mind, he would quote the actual Scripture, just as He did in every other instance in the Gospels when He quoted Scripture. Anything else is pure speculation.

I think that Jesus quoted the first line of Psalm 22 to demonstrate that he was fulfilling the psalm in his crucifixion. Why quote Psalm 22:1 and not Psalm 22:24?

Because the whole Psalm applies to Jesus’ crucifixion. Psalm 22:1 as a stand in for the whole psalm reveals many more connections.

Psalm 22:7-8 details the mocking abuse.
Psalm 22:9-10 details the relationship Jesus had with the Father from birth.
Psalm 22:14 details how water poured out from his side and how his bones are out of joint.
Psalm 22:15 details his diminished strength.
Psalm 22:16 details the circumstances of his death among evil people, his hands and feet pierced.
Psalm 22:17 details the bones protruding, and people gloating.
Psalm 22:18 details the casting of lots for his garments.
Psalm 22:19-23 details the trust of Jesus in his Father.
Psalm 22:24 details the Father’s attitude and position toward his Son on the cross. He listened to his cry for help. God’s face is not hidden from the Son.
Psalm 22:25-31 details the results of the Son’s death concluding with “They will proclaim his righteousness to a people yet unborn.
Psalm 22:31 details the claim that “it is finished.”

Jesus referred the religious leaders to the whole of Psalm 22 to indicate that he was fulfilling all of these things. Can you imagine the stunned thoughts of the Pharisees when they contemplated this psalm with all that they had just witnessed?

[christian cerna]

Don, do you believe that Jesus bore the sins of the world on himself? Think about that for a moment. If you do believe this, that means that all sins(adultery, murder, witchcraft, rebellion, disobedience, fornication, strife, covetousness, greed, gluttony, homosexuality, idolatry, etc, etc.) that men ever sinned from the beginning of creation up until the final judgment, were laid upon the Lamb of God. Do you think God the Father, being holy, could countenance all of that?

With all of those sins upon himself, how could Jesus not feel anguish of spirit, and cry out to God?

Yes, the Father could countenance all of that. God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself. He doesn’t look away. He is in Christ. His eyes are on the righteous … not one of his bones is broken. He does not hide his face from him. The Father and the Son are one. Jesus is not alone on the cross for his Father is with him. etc. etc. etc.

You are either going to believe the words of Scripture and Jesus himself, or you are going to believe in your own opinions. The fact that Psalm 22:1 was transliterated by Matthew and Mark is significant. Psalm 22 itself explains that God did not hide his eyes from Jesus.

As to Judah, God’s eyes are too pure to look upon sin, the sin of Judah, and not punish “them” for their sins. And God does punish Judah by using an even more wicked nation, Babylonia, to do it. And Habakkuk is shocked that God would use evil Babylonia to punish his people, Judah! So, yes, God’s eyes can look upon sin and sinners without turning away.

I don’t believe any of us ever said that Jesus was condemned for us. We know that God did not condemn Jesus, because God did not find Jesus guilty of any sin. We said that Jesus willingly (out of love for the father and us) took on himself the punishment for our sins.

Gal. 4:4-5, “But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, in order that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.”

-Notice it says that Jesus was born under the law(not outside of it).

Gal. 3:13, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us — for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree.”

-Notice it says that the Law is a curse, and that Christ became a curse for us(he was under the law).

Rom. 4:15, “…for the Law brings about wrath.”

- The Law(curse) which Christ took upon himself, brings about the wrath of God.

2 Cor. 5:21, “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”

-Jesus(who was born under the law) became sin on our behalf.

In conclusion, anyone born under the law who bears the curse of the law(the curse of the law is not fulfilling the law) must suffer the wrath of God.

*I am not saying that Christ did not fulfill the law. Rather, he took upon himself the curse(man’s inability to fulfill the law). And as we have seen, the (curse of the)law bring God’s wrath.

Jesus was born under the law. Galatians 4:4-5

(Law = Curse ) Galatians 3:13

Jesus became a curse for us. Galatians 3:13

+ (Curse = Law.) Galatians 3:13

–––––––––––––—

Therefore Jesus became the Law

+ The Law brings about the wrath of God. (Romans 4:15)

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––—

= Jesus suffered the wrath of God when he became a curse.

[christian cerna]

I don’t believe any of us ever said that Jesus was condemned for us. We know that God did not condemn Jesus, because God did not find Jesus guilty of any sin. We said that Jesus willingly (out of love for the father and us) took on himself the punishment for our sins.

Gal. 4:4-5, “But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, in order that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.”

-Notice it says that Jesus was born under the law(not outside of it).

Gal. 3:13, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us — for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree.”

-Notice it says that the Law is a curse, and that Christ became a curse for us(he was under the law).

Rom. 4:15, “…for the Law brings about wrath.”

- The Law(curse) which Christ took upon himself, brings about the wrath of God.

2 Cor. 5:21, “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”

-Jesus(who was born under the law) became sin on our behalf.

In conclusion, anyone born under the law who bears the curse of the law(the curse of the law is not fulfilling the law) must suffer the wrath of God.

*I am not saying that Christ did not fulfill the law. Rather, he took upon himself the curse(man’s inability to fulfill the law). And as we have seen, the (curse of the)law bring God’s wrath.

Many who believe that Christ bore God’s wrath believe this because they claim that God imputed our sins upon Jesus making him guilty for our sins. So on the cross, God condemned Jesus because Jesus took our place on the cross and received our punishment as our substitute.

Gal. 4:4-5 - The promise to Abraham is outside the law (Romans 4:13, Galatians 3:15-20). The law is not opposed to the promises of God (Galatians 3:21). The law does not do away with the promise given by grace (Galatians 3:18). The law does not impart life or righteousness (Galatians 3:31). The righteousness that we receive in Christ is not a result of the law. In this sense, Jesus, is outside of the law. And certainly righteousness does not come from the law. I admit that this is not the most precise way to state this.

You are right that Jesus was born under the law, to redeem those under law, that they too might receive the full rights of sons. Those under the law were Jews. Paul is making the claim that the Messiah, Jesus, is Jewish. Jesus is Israel’s promised Messiah. That’s what the phase, “born under the law” means. Israel’s Messiah was born under the law to redeem those born under the law (Jews). The Jewish Messiah is the Seed of Abraham, first to the Jew and then to the Gentile.

And yet all who are baptized into Christ are sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave or free, male or female. And all are heirs according to the promise (Galatians 3:26-29).

Gal. 3:13 - This verse does not say that the Law is a curse. The curse of the Law is death. We are already dead in our trespasses and sins. And we are all dying physically as well. Christ became a curse for us in that he died for us. As a ransom, “he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone” (Hebrews 2:9). Christ never sinned. He was not subject to the wages of sin, which is death. And yet he died as a ransom to set us free from death. His death destroyed Satan, took our sins away, and defeated death (Hebrews 2:14-17). Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by dying for us, by suffering death for us. That’s the meaning of becoming a curse for us.

Romans 4:15 - Christ didn’t take the law upon himself. Christ alone fulfilled the law and was therefore not under the wrath of God.

2 Cor. 5:21 - Jesus became a sin offering for us.

Conclusion - Jesus is Israel’s Messiah. He is the Seed of Abraham. He redeems both Jews and Gentiles alike from the curse of the law which is death. As a sin offering, he covers our sins. As a ransom, he suffers death to defeat death and destroy the devil. As the Seed of Abraham he imparts life and righteousness. He is the promised blessing to the world.

II Corinthians 5:21 say He was made sin not a sin offering. I think that I’ll add “imputation” to “propitiation” to words that make me thankful for Jesus’ infinitely satisfactory substitution for me.

Jesus became a curse for us. What is a curse, Don? This does not refer to death. For cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree. No where in Scripture does it say that Death is a curse. Death is a punishment, not a curse. Two different things. Everything hangs on this.

Look up the word curse in the Bible. Every time it is used, it is used in one of the following ways:

1. a. An appeal or prayer for evil or misfortune to befall someone or something.

b. The evil or misfortune that comes in or as if in response to such an appeal: bewailed the curse of ill health.
2. One that is accursed.
3. A source or cause of evil; a scourge: “Selfishness is the greatest curse of the human race” (William Ewart Gladstone).

Also, as the previous person pointed out,

For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

2 Cor. 5:21

These words have a serious implication. It doesn’t say that he died for our sins. It says he(God)made him to be sin, who knew no sin.

Basically, this debate hinges on whether you believe in the substitutionary death of Christ. If you don’t, then nothing we say will change your mind. You will keep changing the plain meaning of verses to suit your view point.

I have patiently followed this discussion with interest because I have never heard anyone defend the position Don is making here. It’s been interesting, and in the end has completely confirmed in my mind the penal, substitutionary death of Christ for sinners, bearing in His own body the penalty due our sins.

Don’s arguments are interesting in the same way J. W.’s arguments are interesting against the Trinity and often using the same methods — denying literal and plain meanings, forcing speculative meanings into texts, connecting disjointed texts by finding linguistic similarities, redefining words, and setting forth in glowing terms his own theory, which, after multiple readings of his many posts, still doesn’t make any sense to me. I have no idea what he believes Christ accomplished on the cross, except that in the end it saves us. The most I can say for Don’s presentation is that it’s clever, but that doesn’t make it convincing.

I do agree that the Father turning His face from Christ is somewhat speculative in the sense it draws a conclusion not directly stated, but it certainly has a foundation in Jesus’ own words from the cross. It is hard to shake off the strong impression that we are to read the Gospels precisely to come to that conclusion. To take these incredible words and turn them into a biblical reference and not an experiential reality is hard to accept.

Don’s paraphrase might read, “And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, “Check out Psalm 22!” That doesn’t make it for me. There’s something much deeper going on there. I believe this profound narrative is intended to drive me to conclude the Lord Jesus is experiencing what I deserve as a sinner – to be forsaken by God. That does not mean the Father was not with Him through His trials, the scourging, blows, mockery and even on the cross. But it does seem at some point Jesus experienced God’s wrath on sinners and felt the abandonment we justly deserve. The more I think about it, and this thread has helped me think about it more, the cry of Jesus from the cross could never be surpassed by a mere theological statement in an epistle that Jesus bore God’s wrath. It is best to have it like this –stark and raw as the witnesses saw it. Here we have it thrust upon us with shocking words we cannot ignore.

Does it point to Psalm 22? In a secondary sense, yes. Psalm 22 in its totality tells us that He was not without faith in this experience, nor was He left permanently in this state of abandonment. It protects us from making wrong conclusions about Jesus’ words. Yet the cry itself tells us the experience was very real indeed.

[Wayne Wilson]…Don’s paraphrase might read, “And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, “Check out Psalm 22!”…

Don, one more thing to leave you with. You seem to have the idea that one thing negates the other. Cannot Jesus have offered himself as a sacrifice for our sins(out of love), while also bearing the punishment(wrath) for those sins? One does not negate the other. And that is what all of us here are saying. Your position sounds interesting, and almost convincing, because it is true- in that Jesus offered himself as a sacrifice, and that his blood cleanses us from sin, and that the Father loved the world and sent his son to be the propitiation for our sins. You are trying to get us to disprove this, and you are right we can’t. Because it is true. But it is only a part of the truth.

The birth, life, ministry, and death of Jesus Christ had many purposes. One was to fulfill prophecy(birth, life, miracles, death, etc). Another was to fulfill the law on our behalf(substitutionary life and death). He was also the image of the invisible God, leading us to the Father via his preaching and teachings. He is also the second Adam. This last one would become meaningless if he was not born from a woman, under the law, 100% man, exposed to the same pains and sufferings that we experience, having to go through temptations.(Can someone who is outside the law or who is not expected to obey the law really be tempted?)

You see, there are several things that Christ accomplished for us during his birth, life, ministry, and death in this world. That Christ offered himself as a sacrifice for us, does not negate the fact that he also obeyed(fulfilled) the law perfectly, and also that he bore the punishment(wage) that our sins deserve.

There are many things in Scripture that seem like paradoxes, or are difficult to understand. A person can feel sorrow, grief, sadness, mourning, even forsaken. They can even complain to God, make a plea to God, or even question God in prayer as to why things are happening as they are. Yet that does not mean that they lack faith. On the contrary, they have the faith to know that God loves them and cares for them, and that is why they don’t understand why they are experiencing the things they are. They are seeking guidance, understanding, their daily bread, to be protected from temptation, freed from their enemies, sickness, etc.

[Wayne Wilson]

I have patiently followed this discussion with interest because I have never heard anyone defend the position Don is making here. It’s been interesting, and in the end has completely confirmed in my mind the penal, substitutionary death of Christ for sinners, bearing in His own body the penalty due our sins.

Don’s arguments are interesting in the same way J. W.’s arguments are interesting against the Trinity and often using the same methods — denying literal and plain meanings, forcing speculative meanings into texts, connecting disjointed texts by finding linguistic similarities, redefining words, and setting forth in glowing terms his own theory, which, after multiple readings of his many posts, still doesn’t make any sense to me. I have no idea what he believes Christ accomplished on the cross, except that in the end it saves us. The most I can say for Don’s presentation is that it’s clever, but that doesn’t make it convincing.

I do agree that the Father turning His face from Christ is somewhat speculative in the sense it draws a conclusion not directly stated, but it certainly has a foundation in Jesus’ own words from the cross. It is hard to shake off the strong impression that we are to read the Gospels precisely to come to that conclusion. To take these incredible words and turn them into a biblical reference and not an experiential reality is hard to accept.

Don’s paraphrase might read, “And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, “Check out Psalm 22!” That doesn’t make it for me. There’s something much deeper going on there. I believe this profound narrative is intended to drive me to conclude the Lord Jesus is experiencing what I deserve as a sinner – to be forsaken by God. That does not mean the Father was not with Him through His trials, the scourging, blows, mockery and even on the cross. But it does seem at some point Jesus experienced God’s wrath on sinners and felt the abandonment we justly deserve. The more I think about it, and this thread has helped me think about it more, the cry of Jesus from the cross could never be surpassed by a mere theological statement in an epistle that Jesus bore God’s wrath. It is best to have it like this –stark and raw as the witnesses saw it. Here we have it thrust upon us with shocking words we cannot ignore.

Does it point to Psalm 22? In a secondary sense, yes. Psalm 22 in its totality tells us that He was not without faith in this experience, nor was He left permanently in this state of abandonment. It protects us from making wrong conclusions about Jesus’ words. Yet the cry itself tells us the experience was very real indeed.

What can I say? On the cross, at the ninth hour, in just a few minutes, Jesus quotes from Psalm 22:1 and then quotes from the last word of the Psalm. And in between these two quotes he commits his spirit to his Father. He does all of this in the span of just a few minutes. He makes these statements in rapid succession. But I guess Psalm 34:15-20 is wrong. The righteous really are forsaken by God. Jesus was wrong too. He thought he would not be alone on the cross. But then God the Father abandoned the Son even though the Bible states that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself.

As to what I believe the death of Jesus accomplished on the cross, have you not been reading?

His death destroyed the devil.

His death covered our sins.

His death takes away the sin of the world.

His death defeated death.

His death reconciled us to God.

His death cleansed our consciences from acts that lead to death.

His death opens the door for us to serve the living God.

His death sets us free from sin.

His death enables us to draw near to God.

His death results in justification.

His death redeems us.

His death brings life for all men.

His death results in eternal life.

His act of obedience makes us righteous.

His life saves us from God’s wrath.

I have stated all of this before and you don’t know what I think Jesus’ death and life accomplished? Really?

[christian cerna]

Don, one more thing to leave you with. You seem to have the idea that one thing negates the other. Cannot Jesus have offered himself as a sacrifice for our sins(out of love), while also bearing the punishment(wrath) for those sins? One does not negate the other. And that is what all of us here are saying. Your position sounds interesting, and almost convincing, because it is true- in that Jesus offered himself as a sacrifice, and that his blood cleanses us from sin, and that the Father loved the world and sent his son to be the propitiation for our sins. But there are other truths that go along with that.

It isn’t an issue of whether he could or couldn’t. It is an issue of whether he did or did not according to the Scriptures.

I was reading in Ephesians this morning and this discussion popped right back into my head. Don, how would you read, understand, or translate Ephesians 2:1-7?

And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience—among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved—and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.

I don’t have my Greek tools in front of me, but I’m betting that the adjectival phrase “of wrath” is coupled to the noun form of children. Anyone care to check that for me?