Problems with Penal Substitution.

[JohnMartin]

Introduction

he Son of God himself, and he could do it only by taking our place, assuming our sins, and answering for them as though he himself were guilty of them.

This our dear Lord and only Saviour and Mediator before God, Jesus Christ, did for us by his blood and death

The first and chief article is this: Jesus Christ, our God and Lord, died for our sins and was raised again for our justification (Romans 3:24-25). He alone is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29), and God has laid on Him the iniquity of us all (Isaiah 53:6). All have sinned and are justified freely, without their own works and merits, by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, in His blood (Romans 3:23-25). This is necessary to believe. This cannot be otherwise acquired or grasped by any work, law or merit. Therefore, it is clear and certain that this faith alone justifies us ... Nothing of this article can be yielded or surrendered, even though heaven and earth and everything else falls (Mark 13:31).

Luther, Martin. "The Smalcald Articles," in Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2005, 289, Part two, Article 1.

The Son of God is in hellThus by engaging with the power of the devil, the fear of death, and the pains of hell, he gained the victory, and achieved a triumph, so that we now fear not in death those things which our Prince has destroyed. [Vide Luther, tom. 1 in Concione de Morte, fol. 87. 12.]

http://www.lectionarycentral.com/sat...nstitutes.html

[37818]

. . . Christ [t]hen descended into hell to be punished before being raised . . ."

Before we go beyond this. That is not Biblical and is pure heresy. The redemption was completed on the cross before Christ physically died. Many may well believe that included His physical death too. In either case the redemption was completed on the cross.

[NorrinRadd]

Introduction

Posts like this are excreted when the source neglects Prov. 10:19.

[JohnMartin]

More to come.

JM

[JohnMartin]

Posts like this are excreted when the source neglects Prov. 10:19.

This does not address the many problems associated with penal substitution.

JM

[mossrose]

Christ hen descended into hell to be punished before being raised by the Father to sit at His right hand.

I didn't read your entire thing, too long. But right away this statement struck me as incorrect. Christ did not descend into hell to be punished. He descended there to proclaim His victory over sin and death.

1 Peter 3:19 being one of those that states this.

[JonathanL]

As others have pointed out already, you're conflating the Doctrine of Penal Substitution and the teaching that Christ was punished while He was in hell. There might be some people who believe in this teaching, but you will not find it repeated in the Book of Concord, and if Luther did state anything close to it is not required that a Confessional Lutheran believe in it. Here's what the Book of Concord has to say about Christ's descent into hell:

Source: The Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord, Article IX. Christ's Descent to Hell

1] And since even in the ancient Christian teachers of the Church, as well as in some among our teachers, dissimilar explanations of the article concerning the descent of Christ to hell are found, we abide in like manner by the simplicity of our Christian faith [comprised in the Creed], to which Dr. Luther in his sermon, which was delivered in the castle at Torgau in the year 1533, concerning the descent of Christ to hell, has pointed us, where we confess: I believe in the Lord Christ, God's Son, our Lord, dead, buried, and descended into hell. For in this [Confession] the burial and descent of Christ to hell are distinguished as different articles; 2] and we simply believe that the entire person, God and man, after the burial descended into hell, conquered the devil, destroyed the power of hell, and took from the devil all his might. 3] We should not, however, trouble ourselves with high and acute thoughts as to how this occurred; for with our reason and our five senses this article can be comprehended as little as the preceding one, how Christ is placed at the right hand of the almighty power and majesty of God; but we are simply to believe it and adhere to the Word [in such mysteries of faith]. Thus we retain the substance [sound doctrine] and [true] consolation that neither hell nor the devil can take captive or injure us and all who believe in Christ.

http://bookofconcord.org/sd-descent.php

© Copyright Original Source

[Obsidian]

1 Peter 3:19 being one of those that states this.

It says that he was brought to life by the Spirit, and preached to the spirits in prison by the Spirit. Whatever it is talking about, it isn't saying that he preached to the spirits in prison while he was still dead.

[mossrose]

It says that he was brought to life by the Spirit, and preached to the spirits in prison by the Spirit. Whatever it is talking about, it isn't saying that he preached to the spirits in prison while he was still dead.

Commentary on 1 Peter 3:19 summarized:

Part of God's purpose in Christ's death involved His activities between His death and Resurrection. His living spirit went to the demon spirits bound in the Abyss and proclaimed victory in spite of death. Peter further explained that the Abyss is inhabited by bound demons that have been there since the time of Noah. They were sent there because they overstepped the limits of God's tolerance with their wickedness. Not even 120 of Noah's example and preaching had stemmed the tide of wickedness in his time (Gen.6:1-8). Thus God bound these demons permanently in the Abyss until their final sentencing.

MacArthur Bible Commentary, pg. 1916

[One Bad Pig]

Not in the passage quoted, he doesn't.

[JonathanL]

Introduction

The atonement theology of the reformers (Luther and Calvin) teaches that Christ took the penalty of sin by being punished by the Father, by suffering and dying on the cross. Christ hen descended into hell to be punished before being raised by the Father to sit at His right hand. Thos who have faith in Christ are then justified by faith alone, whereby the righteousness of Christ is imputed to their account, even though the sinner remains sinful.

Actually, Lutheran theology teaches something like this: That Christ took the penalty of sin by suffering and dying on the cross, "descended into hell, conquered the devil, destroyed the power of hell, and took from the devil all his might"*, after which he was raised by the Father to His right hand. Those who have faith in Christ and His work and are baptised into Christ are imputed with Christ's righteousness and receive the Holy Spirit. Their sinful inclinations and nature (i.e original sin) still remain, but they are not held accountable for them, and the Holy Spirit creates and begins to nurture a new nature in them.

Source: Defense of the Augsburg Confession

32] In reference to original sin we therefore hold nothing differing either from Scripture or from the Church catholic, but cleanse from corruptions and restore to light most important declarations of Scripture and of the Fathers, that had been covered over by the sophistical controversies of modern theologians. For it is manifest from the subject itself that modern theologians have not noticed what the Fathers meant when they spake of defect [lack of original righteousness]. 33] But the knowledge of original sin is necessary. For the magnitude of the grace of Christ cannot be understood [no one can heartily long and have a desire for Christ, for the inexpressibly great treasure of divine favor and grace which the Gospel offers], unless our diseases be recognized. [As Christ says Matt. 9:12; Mark 2:17: They that are whole need not a physician.] The entire righteousness of man is mere hypocrisy [and abomination] before God, unless we acknowledge that our heart is naturally 34] destitute of love, fear, and confidence in God [that we are miserable sinners who are in disgrace with God]. For this reason the prophet Jeremiah 31:19, says: After that I was instructed, I smote upon my thigh. Likewise Ps. 116:11: I said in my haste, All men are liars, i.e., not thinking aright concerning God.

35] Here our adversaries inveigh against Luther also because he wrote that "Original sin remains after Baptism." They add that this article was justly condemned by Leo X. But His Imperial Majesty will find on this point a manifest slander. For our adversaries know in what sense Luther intended this remark that original sin remains after Baptism. He always wrote thus, namely, that Baptism removes the guilt of original sin, although the material, as they call it, of the sin, i.e., concupiscence, remains. He also added in reference to the material that the Holy Ghost, given through Baptism, begins to mortify the concupiscence, and creates new movements [a new light, a new sense and spirit] in man. 36] In the same-manner, Augustine also speaks, who says: Sin is remitted in Baptism, not in such a manner that it no longer exists, but so that it is not imputed. Here he confesses openly that sin exists, i.e., that it remains, although it is not imputed. And this judgment was so agreeable to those who succeeded him that it was recited also in the decrees. Also against Julian, Augustine says: The Law, which is in the members, has been annulled by spiritual regeneration, and remains in the mortal flesh. It has been annulled because the guilt has been remitted in the Sacrament, by which believers are born again; but it remains, because it produces desires, against which believers contend. 37] Our adversaries know that Luther believes and teaches thus, and while they cannot reject the matter they nevertheless pervert his words, in order by this artifice to crush an innocent man.

© Copyright Original Source

http://bookofconcord.org/defense_2_o...sin.php#para32


*http://bookofconcord.org/sd-descent.php

[Obsidian]

MacArthur Bible Commentary, pg. 1916

The passage doesn't say that the Holy Spirit preached to the spirits. It says that Jesus did. Also, in context it is not referring to an activity "in between his death and resurrection." It seems to be referring to an activity after his resurrection.

[mossrose]

The passage doesn't say that the Holy Spirit preached to the spirits. It says that Jesus did. Also, in context it is not referring to an activity "in between his death and resurrection." It seems to be referring to an activity after his resurrection.

18. For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit;
19. in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison,
20. who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water.

It refers to Christ being alive in the spirit. It says Christ went and proclaimed victory to the bound spirits. I never said the Holy Spirit did that, although in the strictest sense of the Trinity you could say that if the Son did it, do so did the Spirit, and so did the Father.

Put to death in the flesh, made alive in the spirit, went and made proclamation to the bound spirits all in the same context. Resurrection is not mentioned in the context in these verses.

[JohnMartin]

I didn't read your entire thing, too long. But right away this statement struck me as incorrect. Christ did not descend into hell to be punished. He descended there to proclaim His victory over sin and death.

1 Peter 3:19 being one of those that states this.

Christ's descent into hell is a Calvinist doctrine tied up with the doctrine of penal substitution. You are correct to argue against the Calvinist doctrine by quoting scripture that Christ proclaimed His victory over sin and death.

JM

[JohnMartin]

As others have pointed out already, you're conflating the Doctrine of Penal Substitution and the teaching that Christ was punished while He was in hell.

In Calvinism, both doctrines are tied together.

There might be some people who believe in this teaching, but you will not find it repeated in the Book of Concord, and if Luther did state anything close to it is not required that a Confessional Lutheran believe in it. Here's what the Book of Concord has to say about Christ's descent into hell:

According to Calvin, Christ suffered in hell. See Calvin's institutes of the Christian religion -

Nothing had been done if Christ had only endured corporeal deathengage, as it were, at close quarters with the powers of hell and the horrors of eternal deathCreed appropriately adds the invisible and incomprehensible judgementhttp://www.reformed.org/master/index...hrist_in_hell/

The Catholic church, along with Lutheranism, reject Calvin's doctrine of the suffering Christ in hell.

JM