Atonement Theories Should NOT Divide Christians - David Bercot 

David helped me reconcile with God. The Penal Substitution model was always a stumbling block for me. Bless you, David, for your labor of love and sharing your work with others.

I agree with what you friend Dean Taylor said. This teaching makes the most sense not only biblically and spiritually but also logically. Thank you for sharing the Christian faith of the aerly church. God bless his people in Christ. Amen

J'adore écouter David Bercot. Il explique des choses difiiciles avec des mots simples. Il est vraiment humble et cherche la vérité de tout son coeur. merci tellement pour ces explications qui vont droit au coeur. Ma vision de Dieu a changé depuis que j'écoute ses messages. Je comprends mieux l'amour de Dieu et le sacrifice de Jésus.

Thank you David for doing this video. You did a great job. It was very helpful for me.

Amen brother. A good king dies in battle! Our King is mighty and willing to save.

Always enjoy watching your videos. I am not Anabaptist, and definitely not Calvinist. I think you are correct when you say there were a number of perspectives on the atonement in the early Church. However, the predominant one was what is known as the Christus Victor model. We see that clearly today in Eastern Orthodox theology and worship.

This has been very helpful and informative. Thanks David for the time and effort you’ve invested in this topic and in for your dedication to the Kingdom!

Thank you Dave for making the atonement video 🙌👍

Scripture says Jesus was without sin on the cross, like an innocent sacrificial lamb…

It seems that a larger problem among us christians is not a variety of different views but which issues we held as essential (dogma) or a matter of interpretation. In the David’s installment on early christian beliefs on millennium and rapture, to my memory Justin Martyr is quoted saying “some of us think” or “some of us believe”. Difference of views were present then too. However, the approach how to deal with these views was different…

How can you have unity with someone whose very foundational view of God is a pagan like god that cannot forgive us for our sin but required His son to be skinned alive to pay himself off to cancel my sin debt. ?

Very true. What should divide us are our actions

The problem with these debates within the Anabaptists is that while people like Dean claim to be connected to the teachings of the early church, they have no basis to decide which early church teachings to adopt and which to ignore. It’s left to their own will. There is no ultimate arbiter of truth in the Anabaptist churches. Penal substitution is a small problem in the grand scheme, but is a case in point. Dean holds an orthodox view on non-resistance, but holds a modern view on penal substitution. That’s the problem here. You either accept it as a whole or just do not profess to be faithful to the historic orthodox doctrine. You can’t have it both ways: it’s in fact hypocritical. These disagreements and potential divisions in fact reveal that Anabaptistism is more akin to Protestantism than to historical orthodoxy.

I see 4 references to "propitiation" in the NT. David mentions 2 I think.

What does the Christus Victor model mean in the context of "God is just and the justifier?"

I disagree with David partially here. IF for example a Christian held to the moral influence theory (that the crucifixion is merely an instructional teaching device to show us what love looks like) and denied all other atonement theories, I simply don't see how that Christian could be saved. Whether satisfactory or Christus Victor or Recapitulation or Ransom etc. there does need to be an understanding that the crucifixion was not just a symbol but has a tangible effect which leads to our salvation.

I don’t think that God would take his wrath on his beautiful son & make him suffer.

I don't think Bercot is right about the calvinistic view that Jesus was punished down in hell fire....that's not what calvinists believe, that's heresy. They believe that Jesus in His humanity experienced separation from the Father on the cross, a kind of hellish absence of the Father's love but only in His humanity. No calvinist I know believes Jesus went into the torments section of the underworld to suffer hell fire, this is complete heresy and I say this as a calvinist.

Why can't penal substitution and Christ's victor be both true?

Read the Book of Romans and Isaiah 53:10. The OT and NT supersede the early church fathers. Penal substitutional is foundational.