Why wasn't Jesus eternally tormented?

[Guest]

My question is in light of the teachings of penal substitutionary atonement, and arises from the idea that Jesus took our punishment on the Cross and absorbed God's wrath due towards us. However, Jesus did not suffer the same punishment that we would suffer, actually it is an all together different punishment, as he died.. and was not eternally tormented and according to some.. we will be.

How does your remarks resolve this.. I'm just having trouble seeing that.

Hell is the opposite of God. For example, take antonyms, match up every word that explains who God is, hell is the complete absence of God. I'm just having trouble understanding why you don't see that. Love/Hate - Peace/Fear etc etc..what antonym are you having trouble comparing?

 

[Doulos Iesou]

My question is in light of the teachings of penal substitutionary atonement, and arises from the idea that Jesus took our punishment on the Cross and absorbed God's wrath due towards us. However, Jesus did not suffer the same punishment that we would suffer, actually it is an all together different punishment, as he died.. and was not eternally tormented and according to some.. we will be.

How does your remarks resolve this.. I'm just having trouble seeing that.

Hell is the opposite of God. For example, take antonyms, match up every word that explains who God is, hell is the complete absence of God. I'm just having trouble understanding why you don't see that. Love/Hate - Peace/Fear etc etc..what antonym are you having trouble comparing?

Hell is created BY GOD. How can something be totally the opposite of God, if he created it?

Also, you don't need to make condescending statements like "I'm just having trouble understanding why you don't see that." As if I have a problem with thinking through these issues. I've obviously thought on this issue quite a bit, and I simply have issues with the answers you give as they are not consistent with Scripture.

 

[Guest]

Hell is created BY GOD. How can something be totally the opposite of God, if he created it?

As if I have a problem with thinking through these issues. I've obviously thought on this issue quite a bit, and I simply have issues with the answers you give as they are not consistent with Scripture.

Did God create hell or did Lucifer create it when he sinned against God and fell from heaven? God doesn't send people to hell, people send themselves to hell. The opposite of who God is, as in characteristics and what defines God. Give me an antonym that's bothering you and I will help you understand why hell is what it is.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

You see this is exactly what Gnosticism teaches.. this is not Christianity.

You're saying that among true believers there should be no disagreement? That in the case with Arminians and Calvinists for example one of those groups is Christian and another is not?

Of course I read the Scriptures you posted, which don't reach the conclusion that you have arrived at as I demonstrated specifically with 1 Corinthians 2. Simply praying about a Scripture does not ensure a correct interpretation, this is not how it works. As you incorrectly interpreted a few of those texts you listed, as demonstrated in my last post.

That's not Christianity? What is it?
Yes, I'm saying that among true believers, there should not be disagreement. There is one faith, one spirit, one god. There should be unity within the body. If that is not Christianity, suppose you tell us what it is.

Ephesians 4:1-5

As a prisoner for the Lord, then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received. 2 Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. 3 Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. 4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all./ (NIV)

As for 1 Corinthians 2 which I supposedly misinterpreted, suppose you give us the real interpretation for it. It reads very clearly and plainly.

James 1:17

17 Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows./ (NIV)

This is beginning to be quite off topic.. so we can A) Create a new thread on this issue.. or B) Agree to disagree and carry on.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Did God create hell or did Lucifer create it when he sinned against God and fell from heaven? God doesn't send people to hell, people send themselves to hell. The opposite of who God is, as in characteristics and what defines God. Give me an antonym that's bothering you and I will help you understand why hell is what it is.

You offer no Scripture to support your conclusions here.. and for good reason as I will demonstrate.

God created hell, he has prepared it for the devil and his angels (Matthew 25:41), he alone is the creator and even Gehenna.. the lake of fire is his creation, the expression of his judgement and wrath consistent with his character.

God absolutely sends people to hell, this is easy to disprove.

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels." Matthew 25:41

God tells the wicked to depart from him into the eternal fire.. they don't enter due to their choice.

Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire. Revelation 20:15

"Thrown" or "cast" here is in the passive voice, meaning that this was something done to those whose names were not found written in the book of life. These people were thrown in by God, or on behalf of God at least, into the lake of fire. They did not do this to themselves as "thrown" would then be in the middle voice. This alone is enough to contradict your declaration, so I will stop there even though there are many texts that I could go on to that show your teaching is wrong.

Again, what's bothering me about what you say is that it is contrary to Scripture.

 

[P31Woman]

I'm still confused how any of this supports the position that what Jesus did on the Cross saved us from eternal torment.

The confusion (I believe) may stem from the fact that we are speaking about two different things. The title of this thread refers to the subject that I am am talking about.

Hope that helps.

My question is in light of the teachings of penal substitutionary atonement, and arises from the idea that Jesus took our punishment on the Cross and absorbed God's wrath due towards us. However, Jesus did not suffer the same punishment that we would suffer, actually it is an all together different punishment, as he died.. and was not eternally tormented and according to some.. we will be.

How does your remarks resolve this.. I'm just having trouble seeing that.

Penal Substitution does not teach Jesus had to suffer in hell for our sins.

 

[P31Woman]

From 9 Marks

Is penal substitutionary atonement central to the gospel or just one of many metaphors?

Some scholars and church leaders argue that penal substitutionary atonement—the doctrine that when Jesus died on the cross God punished him for the sins of his people, in whose place he stood—is at best one scriptural metaphor among many. Such teachers argue that we should push penal substitution to the sidelines of the gospel message.

Should we therefore de-emphasize, de-centralize, or even lay aside this doctrine in favor of a

more balanced presentation? Not if we want to be faithful to Scripture. While the Bible does use other images and ideas to describe Christ’s work on the cross (such as healing, reconciliation, and victory over Satan), penal substitutionary atonement is central to the gospel in at least two ways.

1. It’s by far the most common biblical explanation of Christ’s work on the cross. Christ was pierced for our transgressions (Isa. 53:5). The Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all (Isa. 53:6).Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures (1 Cor. 15:3). We’re justified by the blood of Christ (Rom. 5:9). God set forth Christ as a propitiation—a sacrifice that turns away God’s wrath—so that those who believe in Christ would be declared righteous (Rom. 3:25, 1 John 2:2). All of these verses and plenty more (take a look at the book of Leviticus!) speak of God pouring out on Christ the wrath we deserved for our sins. Penal substitution is inescapably central to the Bible’s teaching about the gospel.

1. Penal substitutionary atonement is what makes all of the other images “work.” Christ triumphed over Satan on the cross by bearing God’s wrath in our place and so freeing us from Satan’s power and claims (Col. 2:14-15). Christ healed us by bearing the wounds we deserved (Isa. 53:5). Christ reconciled us to God by satisfying God’s wrath against us (Rom. 5:9-11). According to Scripture, our biggest problem is God’s wrath due to us for our sin. In providing for our greatest need Christ accomplished everything else we need for salvation.

This is from gotquestions

Penal Substitution Theory: This theory sees the atonement of Christ as being a vicarious, substitutionary sacrifice that satisfied the demands of God’s justice upon sin. With His sacrifice, Christ paid the penalty of man’s sin, bringing forgiveness, imputing righteousness, and reconciling man to God. Those who hold this view believe that every aspect of man—his mind, will, and emotions—have been corrupted by sin and that man is totally depraved and spiritually dead. This view holds that Christ’s death paid the penalty for sin and that through faith man can accept Christ’s substitution as payment for sin. This view of the atonement aligns most accurately with Scripture in its view of sin, the nature of man, and the results of the death of Christ on the cross.

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/atonement-theories.html#ixzz2PLJsl1SQ​

 

[P31Woman]

Wayne Grudem in Systematic Theology pg. 579 gives us this defination

"Christ’s death was ‘penal’ in that he bore a penalty when he died. His death was also a “substitution” in that he was a substitute for us when he died. This has been the orthodox understanding of the atonement held by evangelical theologians, in contrast to other views that attempt to explain the atonement apart from the idea of the wrath of God or payment for the penalty for sin"
​

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Wayne Grudem in Systematic Theology pg. 579 gives us this defination

"Christ’s death was ‘penal’ in that he bore a penalty when he died. His death was also a “substitution” in that he was a substitute for us when he died. This has been the orthodox understanding of the atonement held by evangelical theologians, in contrast to other views that attempt to explain the atonement apart from the idea of the wrath of God or payment for the penalty for sin"
​

Yes P31Woman, I am not calling into question the idea of Penal Substitutionary atonement, I am calling those who affirm the doctrine to reconcile it with their idea of the final punishment of the wicked. As Jesus, acting as our substitute suffered a different punishment than those he would be standing in the place of. Suffering death, not eternal torment in hell that has no end.

This is one of the arguments I have advanced in this thread.

 

[P31Woman]

Wayne Grudem in Systematic Theology pg. 579 gives us this defination

"Christ’s death was ‘penal’ in that he bore a penalty when he died. His death was also a “substitution” in that he was a substitute for us when he died. This has been the orthodox understanding of the atonement held by evangelical theologians, in contrast to other views that attempt to explain the atonement apart from the idea of the wrath of God or payment for the penalty for sin"
​

Yes P31Woman, I am not calling into question the idea of Penal Substitutionary atonement, I am calling those who affirm the doctrine to reconcile it with their idea of the final punishment of the wicked. As Jesus, acting as our substitute suffered a different punishment than those he would be standing in the place of. Suffering death, not eternal torment in hell that has no end.

This is one of the arguments I have advanced in this thread.

He is a better substitute don't you agree?

 

[Guest]

God tells the wicked to depart from him into the eternal fire.. they don't enter due to their choice.

Pleaaaseee, everybody has a choice to accept Jesus into their heart while their still breathing, you didn't know that? God doesn't send people to hell, he releases them.

 

[P31Woman]

Criticism; Penal-substitutionary atonement is not possible because Christ did not suffer an equivalent punishment due to us. The unbeliever’s punishment for sin will be eternal. Christ suffered only temporarily




Response: It is true that because man sinned against the infinite Person of God, man’s punishment is to be eternal. It is true that Christ suffered on the cross only temporarily, not eternally.

But the punishment inflicted in those few hours was inflicted on an infinite
Person. Therefore, the penal-substitutionary atonement had infinite value and infinite worth.

To put it in thewords of the Synod of Dort (1618–19), Article 3, pt 2:

“The death of God’s Son is the only and entirely complete sacrifice and satisfaction for sins; it is of infinite value and worth, more than sufficient to atone for the sins of the whole world”

(cf. 1 Pet 1:18–19 Heb 7:23–28 Heb. 9:11–15 Heb. 10:14 ).

Note

Christ’s penal-substitutionary atonement on the cross was not

identical to the suffering due to us, but it was more than sufficiently

equivalent and therefore satisfied the justice of God.



fromhttp://www.dbts.edu/pdf/macp/2007/Dawson,%20Penal%20Substitutionary%20Atonement.pdf

 

[Sparkey]

This is the first time I've been exposed to "penal substitution atonement" and the doctrine.

How does it compare to what we may know more about: Kinsman Redeemer?

(if it's already discussed, just tell me and I can scour the thread, it's not all that long really, and I think the comparison would be of interest)

**********************************************

I've searched the thread for "Kinsman" and have not found it. That's okay. I'm fine with waiting for Judgment day and acknowledge the truth of that today. I know what I'll say. Not because I have full confidence in myself and somehow can discern what I'll do, but just because I trust God that all will declare that He is Just. So I'll say, "God is just." You and I and all will say this. So there is no need to compare the doctrine that you like with that of our Kinsman Redeemer. Not really. We already know.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Pleaaaseee, everybody has a choice to accept Jesus into their heart while their still breathing, you didn't know that? God doesn't send people to hell, he releases them.

I figured that you'd still respond back saying that it's simply not so, so I will account for all the Scripture on the matter to demonstrate how you are error.

And if your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it from you! For it is better for you that one of your members be destroyed than your whole body be thrown into hell. (Mt 5:29).

As I mentioned earlier, the throwing here is the passive voice in the Greek, which demonstrates the subject is being acted upon.

passive — The grammatical voice that signifies that the subject is being acted upon; i.e., the subject is the receiver of the verbal action.

Heiser, M. S., & Setterholm, V. M. (2013; 2013). Glossary of Morpho-Syntactic Database Terminology. Logos Bible Software.​

This proves that the person's whole body is being acted upon, that their whole body is being thrown into Gehenna. The Greek doesn't have a middle voice which would denote that the person was acting upon themselves, they are physically being cast into hell.

And if your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it* from you! It is better for you to enter into life crippled or lame than, having two hands or two feet, to be thrown into the eternal fire! 9 And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it* from you! It is better for you to enter into life one-eyed than, having two eyes, to be thrown into fiery hell! (Mt 18:8–9).

Here we have a similar illustration from Jesus later on in Matthew, the picture being drawn here is that believers ought to cut off and throw away their sinful members or they themselves as a whole will be thrown into the eternal fire aka the fiery hell. I'm not going to get into what this represents, just observing that again we have thrown being in the passive voice.

And do not be afraid of those who kill the body but are not able to kill the soul, but instead be afraid of the one who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.(Mt 10:28).

Another passage from Matthew, here Jesus is talking to just the disciples telling them not to fear those who can merely kill the body, but to fear rather him (being God) who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. God is the one who does the punishing in hell, and the punishment here is the destruction of body and soul in hell. Hell is not the absence of God, it is the presence of God in the form of his justice and wrath.

Serpents! Offspring of vipers! How will you escape from the condemnation to hell? (Mt 23:33).

Here, Jesus is referring to the Pharisee's and note that he doesn't describe hell as a choice, but as a condemnation that they face. Let's examine the Greek word for condemnation:

56.30 κρίνωf; κρίσιςe, εως f; κρίμαd, τος n: to judge a person to be guilty and liable to punishment—‘to judge as guilty, to condemn, condemnation.’

Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). Vol. 1: Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: Based on semantic domains (electronic ed. of the 2nd edition.) (555). New York: United Bible Societies.​

You see it is a judgement rendered against the Pharisee's that he is asking, how will you escape this judgement from God that renders you guilty and condemned to hell?

And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off! It is better for you to enter into life lame than, having two feet, to be thrown into hell! (Mk 9:45).

Another instance of the the word "thrown" being used in the passive voice. This is used again in v.46-47, but let's not go overboard..

But I will show you whom you should fear: fear the one who has authority, after the killing, to throw you into hell! Yes, I tell you, fear this one! (Lk 12:5).

This passage cognates with Matthew 10:28, that they should fear the one who has authority to.. after killing the body.. throw us into hell. This person who we should fear is not ourselves, but God.

And if anyone was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. (Re 20:15).

Another example of "thrown" being in the passive voice. You can find two more instances in Matthew 13:42,50

Conclusion:

All of these texts do not teach that the people are being released by God and that the people are casting themselves into hell, but rather the people are being thrown in as a condemnation of God's righteous judgement to suffer the punishment of eternal fire on account of their sins.

Judges don't release criminals to receive the judgement they choose, they administer a judgement on account of the choices of the person and prescribe a punishment and condemnation the guilty party surely does not want or choose.

 

[Grappler]

God tells the wicked to depart from him into the eternal fire.. they don't enter due to their choice.

Pleaaaseee, everybody has a choice to accept Jesus into their heart while their still breathing, you didn't know that? God doesn't send people to hell, he releases them.

Show me book, chapter, and verse that says God 'releases' people to Hell. Urk are not aware that Christianity took time to spread around the world? There have been many people who never heard of Jesus...so please stop this silliness of saying everyone has or had a choice to choose Jesus. Urk are not aware that God is omnipotent? He doesn't have to allow someone to be tortured for eternity...if He doesn't want to. Why would a loving God who tell his children to forgive their enemies turn around and torture those who rejected Him? Sort of do as i say but not as i do huh??lol

 

[Guest]

Revelation 20:15 - And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.

How does one get his name written in the Book of Life, what do we have to do exactly?

 

[P31Woman]

God tells the wicked to depart from him into the eternal fire.. they don't enter due to their choice.

Pleaaaseee, everybody has a choice to accept Jesus into their heart while their still breathing, you didn't know that? God doesn't send people to hell, he releases them.

Show me book, chapter, and verse that says God 'releases' people to Hell. Urk are not aware that Christianity took time to spread around the world? There have been many people who never heard of Jesus...so please stop this silliness of saying everyone has or had a choice to choose Jesus. Urk are not aware that God is omnipotent? He doesn't have to allow someone to be tortured for eternity...if He doesn't want to. Why would a loving God who tell his children to forgive their enemies turn around and torture those who rejected Him? Sort of do as i say but not as i do huh??lol

Do you not realize God is ominipotent? When people chose not to reject what they know about God he is more than able to bring the message of Christ to them. You desire to say God tortures people I believe God gives perfect justice that shows his great love. Yes people are without excuse before God.

Romans 1

18 For God’s wrath is revealed from heaven against all godlessness and unrighteousness of people who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth, 19 since what can be known about God is evident among them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For His invisible attributes, that is, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen since the creation of the world, being understood through what He has made. As a result, people are without excuse. 21 For though they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God or show gratitude. Instead, their thinking became nonsense, and their senseless minds were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man, birds, four-footed animals, and reptiles.

24 Therefore God delivered them over in the cravings of their hearts to sexual impurity, so that their bodies were degraded among themselves. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served something created instead of the Creator, who is praised forever. Amen.

 

[P31Woman]

This is the first time I've been exposed to "penal substitution atonement" and the doctrine.

How does it compare to what we may know more about: Kinsman Redeemer?

(if it's already discussed, just tell me and I can scour the thread, it's not all that long really, and I think the comparison would be of interest)

**********************************************

I've searched the thread for "Kinsman" and have not found it. That's okay. I'm fine with waiting for Judgment day and acknowledge the truth of that today. I know what I'll say. Not because I have full confidence in myself and somehow can discern what I'll do, but just because I trust God that all will declare that He is Just. So I'll say, "God is just." You and I and all will say this. So there is no need to compare the doctrine that you like with that of our Kinsman Redeemer. Not really. We already know.

Sorry but I missed several pages of this thread. I honestly don't know a connection with Kisman and this theory of atonement. My best guess would be it has to do with having the ability to pay the price required and then you caring for them.

(BTW, I guess the OP is not interested in discussing OP)

 

[Sparkey]

(BTW, I guess the OP is not interested in discussing OP)

Well, I don't want to talk about the Original Poster, I want to talk about the post and the subject. I already talked about the title of the thread. He wasn't tormented. And He fulfilled Scripture. Jesus spoke about the "sign of Jonah" and that's what He did and also Jesus was given authority to take his life up and also given a command by His Father. He said he was the Good Shepherd. Why would the good shepherd abandon his sheep eternally? He wouldn't. I don't get this whole idea about, "Because God said, 'In the day ye eat thereof, ye shall surely die,' and how that means eternal." I guess this concept is a sideways challenge to people who say that God Must do something or other but I don't see the law that says God Must anything.

So he was our kinsman redeemer and the bible talks about that. You've read the book of Ruth. There's laws and rules regarding that. Also, I can see that Jesus played the role of a scapegoat, and there are laws and rules about that. Scapegoat isn't the same as what I always thought and I know we're in apologetics and theology and I'm supposed to know all about everything that I say, and be able to defend doctrine and teaching, but all I'm saying is that these things ARE in the bible and I don't find them in this thread.

You know?

 

[Doulos Iesou]

So he was our kinsman redeemer and the bible talks about that. You've read the book of Ruth. There's laws and rules regarding that. Also, I can see that Jesus played the role of a scapegoat, and there are laws and rules about that. Scapegoat isn't the same as what I always thought and I know we're in apologetics and theology and I'm supposed to know all about everything that I say, and be able to defend doctrine and teaching, but all I'm saying is that these things ARE in the bible and I don't find them in this thread.

You know?

I think you're misunderstanding the main idea of my thread. I am a Conditionalists, and one of the major thrusts of my argument in this thread is to take the penal substitutionary atonement model and show how it is not compatible with the eternal torment view of hell, but rather works better with my conception. That the wicked die the second death in the lake of fire.. the the wages of sin is death.

This is not a comprehensive look into the nature of the atonement, but rather the final punishment of the wicked.