Did God punish Jesus in our place? Steve Chalke vs Andrew Wilson debate #3 

@Matt no u

Bless your heart, but why emotionalize, brother? Penal Substitution is a volcano-god interpretation and the most brilliant of Bible Scholars have been taking notice for quite some time now. There are other interpretational options that the laity at large are unaware of. Basically, God allowed His Son to "lay down" His own life, rather than "punish". The Father made a sacrifice that the obedient unto death Son was willing to make, though He struggled in prayer at the Garden of Gethsemane.

Do you not see Steve on your screen or is he not a "British Christian" in your eyes?

Jesus was God so theres that.

Exactly. The christus victor view of the cross is way more biblical

The cross would have been a failure or just a punishment if it weren`t for the Resurrection. YHWH ha Elohim would NOT have raised a false Messenger.

By ignoring the clear meaning of scripture?

There is a Season for Pruning.

In our church we don't sing about 90% of church songs because of their content!

"if only men knew what is eternity, he will do all in his power to change" - "Among adults there are few saved because of the sins of the flesh, with exception of those who die in childhood most men will be damned" - a ringing of truth in today's society with its liberal take on sex, abortion, adultery, etc....

"So then, let us not attribute to God’s actions and His dealings with us any idea of requital. Rather, we should speak of fatherly provision, a wise dispensation, a perfect will which is concerned with our good, and complete love. If it is a case of love, then it is not one of requital; and if it is a case of requital, then it is not one of love. Love, when it operates, is not concerned with the requiting of former things by means of its own good deeds or correction; rather, it looks to what is most advantageous in the future: it examines what is to come, and not things that are past." "I also maintain that those who are punished in Gehenna are scourged by the scourge of love. For what is so bitter and vehement as the punishment of love? I mean that those who have become conscious that they have sinned against love suffer greater torment from this than from any fear of punishment. For the sorrow caused in the heart by sin against love is sharper than any torment that can be. It would be improper for a man to think that sinners in Gehenna are deprived of the love of God." -- St Isaac of Nineveh

because you're a dumbass prot who doesnt understand Christianity

@@mclkr9174 do you know how the masses recognized Peter was a disciple of Jesus after Jesus was captured by the Romans? Right before Peter denied Jesus they identified him by they way he spoke. You don’t speak like a Christian. It seems to me you have a long way to go. If you can’t even control your fingers from cursing....

You prefer “how the original has been translated and dogmatic edited”. FIFY

@@garciacentral do you think the translations are at fault? Please show which ones and why. You know you can always go back to the original Greek and Hebrew.

sorry to be offtopic but does anyone know a trick to log back into an Instagram account..? I was stupid forgot the password. I would appreciate any tricks you can give me

Penal substitution is another gospel. The Son does not save us from the Father by presenting innocent blood for Him to shed. That's morally offensive, contrary to Scripture (cf. Prov 6:17), philosophically ridiculous, heretically divides the godhead, nowhere found in the writings of the church fathers, and violates the character of God revealed in Christ. We are saved from slavery to sin and death, not from a violent pagan deity who needs blood to be appeased.

@@ElasticGiraffe How are we saved from sin and slavery by Jesus death?

Penal Substitution is a volcano-god interpretation and the most brilliant of Bible Scholars have been taking notice, for quite some time now. There are other interpretational options that the laity at large are grossly unaware of. Basically, God allowed His Son to "lay down" His own life, rather than "punish". The Father made a sacrifice that the obedient-unto-death Son was willing to make, though He struggled in prayer at the Garden of Gethsemane.

There is no more false gospel than Penal substitution!

Yes amen , all people are sinners and therefore we cannot be reconciled with God who is absolutely holy and righteous , unless our sin is removed. And scripture is clear that without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness ". Hebrews 9 v 22b , and Praise the Lord that the Father punished Jesus in our place so that we could be forgiven as many verses teach , for example: " Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief. When You make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, And the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand " Isaiah 53 v 1

Penal Substitution is a volcano-god interpretation and the most brilliant of Bible Scholars have been taking notice, for quite some time now. There are other interpretational options that the laity at large are grossly unaware of. Basically, God allowed His Son to "lay down" His own life, rather than "punish". The Father made a sacrifice that the obedient-unto-death Son was willing to make, though He struggled in prayer at the Garden of Gethsemane.

All people are sinners and therefore we cannot be reconciled with God who is absolutely holy and righteous , unless our sin is removed. And scripture is clear that without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness ". Hebrews 9 v 22b , and Praise the Lord that the Father punished Jesus in our place so that we could be forgiven as many verses teach , for example: " Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief. When You make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, And the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand ". Isaiah 53 v 10

@@stevenmcglade8564 Both of those passages are good examples of translators tampering with the text to get it to say what they want. When JWs do this, we rightly rant and rail against them, but PSA translators do the same. Is. 53:10 is never mentioned in the New Testament, which is quite incredible if it is about Jesus making an offering! In fact, the word "offering" is not in either the Masoretic or LXX texts, as it is assumed and supplied by the translators! Furthermore, there are multiple translation options that leave the author’s intent very vague, especially when the Hebrew Masoretic text is compared to the Greek LXX text. Hebrews 9:22 “Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.” The words “of sins” are not in the Greek text! Also, the word “forgiveness” is the Greek word “aphesis” which means “to let go, to release.” “Aphesis” is only forgiveness in a derivative, secondary sense, as a metaphor. In Chapters 8-9 the author is explaining to a Jewish audience that there is now a new and better covenant. The problem a Jew would have is that they can’t just flippantly abandon the Mosaic covenant for a new one; something and someone must authorize the setting aside of the old to be superseded by the new. This scenario is the context. Verse 1 of chapter 9 starts with, “Now even the first [covenant] had regulations…” Now there has been a change because Christ, God’s anointed, is introduced in verse 11: “But when Christ appeared as a high priest…,” he entered the holiest place with his own blood, not animal blood (verse 12). “For this cause he is the mediator of a new covenant…” (verse 15). The summary of verses 1-24 is that Moses inaugurated the first covenant on earth with animal blood and an earthly tabernacle, while Christ inaugurated this new superseding covenant with his own blood. Verse 22 indicates the legal principle with two claims: 1. "under the law almost everything [but not everything] is purified [set apart, dedicated] with blood," and 2. "without the shedding of blood there is no" release (aphesis) of the prior covenant for inaugurating a second. Once the entire context is understood, at least in the big picture, it becomes clear that verse 22 has nothing at all to do with forgiveness of sin, but rather that there was no release of the former covenant without first shedding blood. God forgave people throughout the Old Testament. Many passages state this. PSA is a serious misunderstanding of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.

I agree, nicely stated. I do like the formal debates, (these I call conversations) but they usually run into sometime of miscommunication based on their world view or a misunderstanding of what the other believes in.

The problem is that the word interpreted (not translated) as punishment by some English versions is wrong, the Hebrew word Musar #4148 in Isa 53:5 says Correction, Chastisement, Discipline to which God teaches as distinct from His punishment involving wrath. That is why it is said in Proverbs 3:12 and Hebrews 12:4-11 those whom God receives as ligit children are chastised/disciplined and scourged. Sense Jesus' suffering upon the tree saved us from Wrath as our ransom, then clearly punishment and discipline are two different actions from God for two different reasons. PSA stands just not as Wrathful PSA but Disciplinary PSA or as I have coined it Equivalent Disciplinary Substitionary Atonement. Because Propitiation did occur through what affliction Father caused His Son according to Isa 53:5;10kjv Jesus being God's justification by how He treated His ligit Son while righteous yet in the likeness of sinful flesh, to act towards those whom by faith are baptized in Christ being imputed His righteousness are treated if they stumble into sin,instead of remaining under wrathful suffering. we suffer as Christ by partaking in His Body(1 corinthians 12:13kjv) but only many until His return will partake in His Cup and Baptism of death( Matthew 20:22-23kjv)being Chastized and Scourged even unto death(matthew 16:24) in order to learn what obedience is picking up our own poles to partake in God's Holiness. Jesus being in the LIKENESS of sinful flesh yet not the embodiment of wickedness(Ezekiel 33:11), being made a curse for us by condemning sin in the flesh(not Jesus) while dieing on a tree/pole yet not accursed(1 Cor 12:3kjv) to free us from the curse of the Law in order to be corrected with discipline and scourging as Christ our source and example so we are not condemned with the world(1 Cor 11:32) Although Gods Son being born in the fullness of Him, being perfect in nature and spirit without blemish, volunteered to suffer for our sins through corrective chastening and scourging unto death to learn obedience(Isa 53:5 Hebrews 5:8-9 Phillip 2:7-8) being made spiritually mature and the pioneer of our salvation for the elects sake as God's Equivalent Disciplinary Substitution(TRUE PSA) to be our sin and guilt atonement as our ransom in order to Propitiate and Justify Father to correct the Elect through such suffering instead of leaving us under His wrath. Putting on Christ by being baptized in Him while partaking in His Body and Cup takes on a more deeper revelation understood within scripture once one connects the dots of His suffering not only as a remembrance of how and why He died for our sake but what it means for us in lifestyle while following Him. Such connection is marred when one disassociates through Wrathful Penal substitution atonement, what Christ went through from what and why we also partake in while in Him. Sense one is taught through Wrathful PSA that what Jesus goes through as our substitute(the just for the unjust) is not what we will go through as our source and example set. they miss the whole purpose of His suffering correction By Father for our sins(not just for His own Righteousness by evil men) and why we are corrected while in Him partaking in His suffering(not just suffering for Righteousness by evil mankind) but also suffering correction to know obedience as a grant(philip 1:29; Acts 14:22) instead of remaining under wrath even if we do sin. Too often teachers of Wrathful PSA had made synonymous Gods punishment with His discipline within the English translations when in reality God makes a distinction between the two in scripture because of what His Son was predeterminedly sent to face for our sins as righteous otherwise there would be no justification for us to be disciplined while being imputed Jesus' righteousness yet still stumble nor teach of such distinctions. Even a severe discipline is not an punishment from GOD sense punishment is taught as coming from Wrath not Gods Mercy and Love. The teaching in Hebrews 12:4-11 Should open ones mind to reflect Jesus' suffering as our source and example and what we go through until His return while in Him following after Him.

That is not in texts before the 10th century Masoretic text. That is the problem most Bible translations are based on a 10th century AD text that has 6000 variations from the earlier texts. In the Masoretic text another issue you come to if you read Isaiah 53 in context also with the neighboring chapters the Jews are right that it is about Israel not the Messiah. The Jews did this on purpose and then added language that would be against the whole Torah if applied to the Messiah.

I disagree

@@bobpolo2964 may I ask why?

@@euanthompson God doesn't have to punish sin. He chooses to out of His own sovereign freedom. To reduce the gospel to God satisfying His wrath distorts His character and the Scripture

@@bobpolo2964 shall we say then that God is apathetic to evil?

@@euanthompson No

Sin isn't a crime it doesn't need punishing. Forgiveness is a free gift requiring nothing , if God had to punish someone then it's not forgiveness

@@martinfell9165But sin hurts and forgiveness hurts. Sin hurts oneself and the other , forgiveness liberates oneself and the other by absorbing the pain. This is at least one way to look at the cross.

Horrible idea,'punished in our place'' how would that work and how is it justice? in any logic IF you have done something wrong (not even going into the ridiculousness of being guilty of what A & E are supposed to have done) YOU pay for it /make it right not someone else ,even a god.

@@frankwhelan1715 You're right about that: it's not "justice"! Not in our puny human sense, anyway. It's unmerited "grace" and pure "mercy". Jesus transfers his perfection to us sinners; and in exchange HE took our sins upon Himself. So the sins are paid for in-full ...by HIM. Accordingly, God judges us as "not guilty" because Jesus has already paid the price. Jesus was truly innocent but was declared "guilty" for all of our sins - and paid for them through the passion and crucifixion. Thus, He won our victory over both death and hell. It's often colloquially termed, "God's great exchange" - because God (Jesus) exchanged his pure white robe for our scarlet robes. We get to wear His white robe when we meet our judgment. He wore our scarlet robes and served our sentences.

@@RockHudrock 'He won our victory '' who did he win it off,is he not the boss top man ,nobody above him,? he could play it any way he wants, do you think there'd be humans going to him complaining,oh this heaven is not as good because you didn't have a bloody death for us on the cross. nonsense!

frank whelan Google “the Trinity”

frank whelan He did not defeat God (the Father), he defeated sin, Satan and death.

God punished himself!

Images of debt payment and criminal punishment are not the same. Even so, debt forgiveness means the debt is forgiven, not paid by someone else or paid by the creditor to himself, whatever that could mean.

So, ancient Christians interpreted “it is finished” as in “Jesus fulfilled the law” no one sees that as “God’s wrath on his Son” .

Showing lack of understanding of the trinity

This is so true its like Steve sees God as loving rather than jealous when really he is jealous because he is loving. His view is detracting from the glory of Jesus' sacrifice and i think thats a biblically grounded criticism rather than just my/our self asserted argument.

Wow….just no. Creating caricatures perhaps 🤔 Let’s begin with, “God is not angry,” shall we. His emotions are not contingent on our behavior. He’s God, for God’s sake.

This is so brillant!

I think the more life you live, the more you realize that the abusers are usually also victims themselves if studied with enough intuition. Most child abusers were abused themselves for example.

Jesus let Himself be punished by UNJUST suffering and death as to show how FAR to the extreme God is willing to go to show His LOVE. Otherwise God, and Jesus, the exact reflection of who unchangeable God is (Hebrews 1:3), HAD only one solution: to smack them and destroy them all on the spot, Jews and Romans alike, since they dared to commit such injustice to Him. As perfect obedient Son of God Jesus is willing to suffer for OUR sake. It was not His will to suffer for God's sake/pleasure/will or whatever.

Is there a difference between eternal torture and annihilation, both assume God harms humans. Perhaps the truth is, God is innocent and sin is guilty, sin alone kills us! Hence we need saving, not from God, but from the sin that is killing us.

Ainsley Stevenson And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. (Matthew 10:28, ESV)

@@TheApologeticDog The very next words: "Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father. But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows." Fear he, fear not. Hm. Next Scripture says "Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven." And in Isaiah 45 "Not I Yehovah? And no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; none beside me. Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I God, and none else. I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear. Surely, shall say, in Yehovah have I righteousness and strength: to him shall come; and all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed. In Yehovah shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and shall glory." This prophecies of the final judgement when all shall confess Christ. Again "Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven."

@@ainsleystevenson9198 I do feel it reveals Gods true nature/character. Seeing and finding out that The One True God IS LOVE and that he has and never was planning on tutoring people and demons for ever and ever till eternity, but it rather shows another side of Gods true character we have not been taught. Now you ask Why. Well dont you want to get know your best friend a little better? And for a lot of people out there searching for truth, eternal hell is a deciding line on whether they choose to follow God or not. And don't know or have't heard that God and the bible don't teach about eternal torment. That this teaching is a Greek doctrine that entered into Christianity by false prophets manipulating Bible teachings. God is love. God isn't torture

Or a three-way discussion: endless conscious torment vs. annihilationism vs. universal reconciliation.

That is how people who know they are not right but don’t want a dissenting opinion to be heard act!

David Clark I suppose then that another foolproof way to see if someone is regenerated is if they understand that God is motivated by Love and if they understand Grace. I mean I suppose there must be more than one foolproof way of determining this? But who are we to go about trying to determine such things as they involve other people?

John tells us that whoever is born of God doesnt sin. Their theology is irrelevant. If believing in the correct theology is what gets us to heaven, then infants, retarded people, the unborn, the uneducated, and the comatose would all be doomed for hell. Jesus did say "be ye perfect, even as your father in heaven is perfect". The question isnt if a person has the same opinion as you. But if they live in light of the indwelling of Christ.

I so agree as Jesus was one of us, and died for us to show us that faith works, and he did remove the curse of death for the faithful. It is the law of faith. Jesus was never a substitute but he represented mankind.

Agree.. I think there's a harmony to be found in the middle that both Greg Boyd and NT Wright speak of and promote. Will check your book out..

Stilgar74 thanks for the reply and for being willing to check out my book. My aim was to write a book that did justice to the Christus Victor view but also gave a strong basis for God’s wrath condemning sin (but not interpreting that as inflicting punishment on his Son to pay off his offended justice). Would love to know your thoughts after you read it. Shalom.

TY

Hermeneutics is all about how the reader feels. Person A reads the bible doesn't like they what they read so they make up something that makes them feel better about what they read

Penal substitution didn't exist in the church for the first 1500 years. Saying a non PSA view is a "watered down version" is just self-inflated egotistic nonsense. In all the preachings of the Gospel done by the disciples in Acts, there is no preaching of PSA at all. My biggest beef with PSA is that it denies forgiveness as a key character of God. God needs to maneuver around some of his other qualities in order to gain a capital to effect forgiveness. He can't just forgive. Scriptually, this is just plain nonsense.

@@bakayaroo44 Your use of "forgiveness" there betrays a misunderstanding of what it means when God forgives. It is not emotional or psychological at its heart, although they are involved. It is legal, even justice, at its heart. He cannot forgive legally until his justice has been satisfied. Because of his love, he sent his Son to satisfy that justice so that he can legally forgive us of our sins. In a sense, therefore, sins can never ever ever be forgiven, but repentant believing sinners can because of the penal substitutionary atonement if his Son.

@@tiqvahone No, it doesn't betray my misunderstanding. It just shows that I disagree with your idea of forgiveness. I don't buy that God cannot legally forgive until "justice" has been served. That kind of forensic understanding of forgiveness is birthed out of the Reformers and is absent from the 1st century framework. You are reading Reformed theology into the biblical text. Also the term "justice" is badly mangled in PSA understanding. God freely forgiving is not an injustice, that is how God is, that is perfect justice. Even one of the favourite PSA passage completely obliterates PSA. " they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith. He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed" (Romans 3:24-26 NRSV). See, justification is a GIFT, which is given freely, not through a substitutionary sacrifice, and again he PASSED OVER our sins, not gained a necessary capital to forgive it. It's free forgiveness. It is exactly the kind of forgiveness Jesus taught in the parable of the two debt owners, and shown in the father of the prodigal son as well. PSA barely explains Pauline understanding of the Gospel (on close examination it's actually a very bad reading of Paul, as Douglas Campbell has shown in The Deliverance of God and Pauline Dogmatics), and has absolutely no answer to Christ's straightforward teachings and actions of forgiveness.

@@bakayaroo44 Before I answer your point more fully, I'd like to know/understand what your view is on why Jesus had to suffer and die such a death then?

BUT his potential mischaracterization of God under such a view is far less egregious than if we were to believe otherwise. If I'm going to error on understandung the nature of God I'd prefer it be that I over estimate his love, forgiveness, mercy, grace, than to undermine it. Im personally agnostic on this issue. Frankly, I'm comfortable not completely understanding how the atonement works. I highly doubt either view has it 100% correct. And yet I can sympathize with portions of each argument. I'm quite thankful this is not a salvation/gospel issue.

@@jdm11060 totally agree

Penal Substitution is a volcano-god interpretation and the most brilliant of Bible Scholars have been taking notice, for quite some time now. There are other interpretational options that the laity at large are grossly unaware of. Basically, God allowed His Son to "lay down" His own life, rather than "punish". The Father made a sacrifice that the obedient-unto-death Son was willing to make, though He struggled in prayer at the Garden of Gethsemane.

And Catholics dont take the Bible seriously enough

"Whoever drops the most decontextualized Bible verses wins!" - Evangelical Protestant peanut gallery

Omg thank you! Finally someone who understands lol. You couldn’t have said it any better.

So if Christ just needed to die, why didn't he die of old age, or a suddent death for example? Why did he need to be tortured and be crucified, dying in one of the most inhumane ways possible? Why was he so scared in the garden before the crucifiction? Why did he claim "Why have you forsaken me" on the cross if he wasn't being punished?

I think so, he was human after all

LEE WILLIS - In His human divinity yes He must have been. The reason why He came was to endure pain and die for us so in that moment of being beaten, whipped and ultimately crucified yes, He would have been scared

He knew the pain and agony his human body would go through and that is why he prayed and the anguish caused blood to seep from his eyes. That he was willing to still go ahead shows the love, courage and sacrifice he was willing to make for us.

@@iain5615 please correct me if I am wrong, but are you referring to the sweat drops being like blood?

@@euanthompson no, medical evidence shows that when someone is suffering from extreme anguish blood can literally seep from a person's eyes. It's rare but it does happen.

Father's Heart What a wholly inadequate argument. While a father may get angry or want to train their child in righteousness, at no time if my son were to reject me would I want to send him to eternal torment. This is not an adequate analogy.

My friend, God doesn’t send people to hell, people choose to go there. God through Jesus offering to every man to choose life eternal. But wages of sin is death. I train my children to walk right before God , but if they choose not to, I would be very sad about it, but it’s their choice. There are sheep and goats, there are those that build house on the rock or sand.

Father's Heart Again, not good logic. Who would willingly “choose” to go to hell? Makes no sense. The hell you speak of is largely a construct of western Christianity, a combination of Greek and Nordic mythology, sprinkled with a little of Dante’s inferno. No one in their right mind would choose hell.

I’m Jew , it’s speaks of eternal punishment and eternal blessing after death in Old Testament. R u a Christian? Is bible a truth for u?

Not true bible doesn't even say in one place the wrath of God was poured out on christ. Nor was it a punishment.

Josh Andreapolous, So what was in the cup that Jesus prayed about in Gethsemane? He wasn’t sweating great drops of blood for nothing.

@@1988TheHitman The cup was the crucifiction. Symbolic of the cup he was to drink from. Also of the cup at passover I think, which represented His blood poured out as a drink offering

Bungalo Bill Either justice will be paid by the actual sinner who transgresses God’s will or it will be paid in full by another who stands in the sinner’s place. Jesus Christ alone can stand in a sinner’s place and receive the punishment that the sinner deserves; if we do not trust Him to satisfy God’s justice for us, then we will have to endure the full brunt of the Father’s wrath ourselves (John 3:36; 14:6).

@@1988TheHitman Yes but if we are punished instead of Christ then we are being punished for our actual sin. We are guilty of and punished forever (Hell) Why the price had to be paid by one who was not guilty before we can be declared not guilty through his sacrifice. In Christ is to be viewed as innocent Why Jesus suffering was temporary. Because he was suffering but was without sin

Akindele Bankole There’s only one truth and its for everyone. Phillip converts an African in Acts 8. Ethiopia has been Christian for almost 1700 years now. I know Ethiopia is East African not West African, but if you have an Ethiopian Orthodox Church in your area you should go visit. They practice traditional, historical Christianity

@@qazattack4 Thank you for your response. I actually agree with you that there is only one truth to the claims of creation. I also believe that the truth is universal and understandable to all at the same level and would transcend cultures, classes, and races. The fact that most of the religious concepts we have to date are mostly devisive and retributive suggest to me that we are not near that universal truth yet.

Akindele Bankole I never thought about it that way. But I think that if you say there’s only one truth, that’s naturally divisive. Those who believe the truth vs those who don’t. Do you think that there could a religion that could solve that problem?

@@qazattack4 That is a good question. Although I think if there was a one stop religious shop, it would be obvious to everyone equally. If there is such a cohesive universal message for all human beings, I can't imagine it in any specific language, to a specific people, at a specific time, for merely one or a few specific reason(s), and to satisfy a desiring or wanting God. However, I can see individuals or even a people interpreting what they believe the universal message is, using their own stories, environment, language, traditions etc..., to shape the religious text.

Akindele Bankole I disagree that everyone would accept the truth if they heard it. In Christianity we believe that people are fallen and corrupt but still made in the image of God. Which means that people are both drawn towards the truth/God and at the same time are drawn towards evil and lies. Also I think Christianity has proven itself to be a religion for all nations and all cultures. I just looked up the numbers and here’s the number of Christians on each continent in 2010: North/South America: 804m Europe: 566m Sub Saharan Africa: 516m Asia/Pacific: 285m North Africa/Middle East: 13m Christians are everywhere and make up almost 1/3 of the global population.

A sex trafficked women who is forced against her will is not guilty for the sin she is forced to perform. God knows why we do things and if we do them due to our own desires then they are sins no matter how we try to justify them. If however they are forced upon us then God will know this also..

He is distinguishing between G-d punishing people and the consequences of sin manifesting out of humanity and nature. He is not distinguishing between a person suffering for his or her own sin and third parties suffering because of pathological behavior. I think you missed his point unless you think G-d is up in heaven throwing lightening bolts. Also think he is arguing what he thinks the Bible teaches which i think is fair. You can disagree but it is a matter of opinion.

The way you talk is cruel and sarcastic and lacks humility and love. Are you really interested in listening to what your brother Steve has to say (and then disagreeing in love and even trying to persuade him to your view), or do you not think you are brothers at all? Ephesians 4:1-6 is a great passage to pray on here.

I'm sorry that my sarcastic comment distracted from the issue at hand even though God is sometimes sarcastic in the Bible. I will remove the seven offensive words and post my comment again, because I really am trying to convince from the Bible. And based on my recollection of the video from a year ago when I watched it, no I really don't believe we are brothers. We Believe something completely different about who God is and about who Jesus is. Could I ask you, did Jesus obey Ephesians 4 when he interacted with the Pharisees? Was he cruel and unloving and lacked humility when he pointed out their errors in very strong terms? Calling them names, saying they were leading people astray from God? The difference I have strikes at the very heart of the Gospel, the very nature of who God is. so would you be willing to interact? Do you think god is vengeful? Does he have wrath towards sin? Can the guilty go unpunished - is that Justice?

Vengeance is mine I will repay says the Lord. Old and New testament. Therefore love your enemies. that's in the Bible. I'd like to know what he thinks about God's justice.

Look up the Christus Victor view, the moral influence view, or Rene Gierard's view. All are viable alternatives.

A Christus Victor plus recapitulation model, with some ransom view elements, is the ancient consensus. Christ assumed everything we are by nature so that we may become everything He is by grace. He submitted to our cursed condition and the injustice of the sinful world, entering death itself for our sake, so that we would be raised up with Him. Man is no longer enslaved to death after we were cut off from God, the source of Life. The cross of Christ is the Tree of Life in God's new creation. Death has lost its sting. Eastern iconography of the resurrection depicts Christ, having burst open the gates of Sheol, lifting Adam and Eve up out of the grave.

@@ElasticGiraffe But if he just need to die to share our nature, then why didn't he die of old age, or of suddent death for example? Why did he need to be tortured and be crucified, dying in one of the most inhumane ways possiblem? Why wad he so scared in the garden before the crucifiction? Why did he claim "Why have you forsaken me" on the cross if he wasn't being punished?

@@whitehorse3724 Jesus did not die of natural causes or by accident because He submitted to death voluntarily, and moreover the violent, fallen world could not tolerate God in the flesh. He had to offer Himself willingly to the Father. He had to die a humiliating death and be numbered among the transgressors. He had to be raised up both as an offering to God and to meet the prince of the power of the air in his own domain. He died with His arms extended to embrace the world that put Him to death. He was afraid in the garden of Gethsemane because He was about to suffer a terrible betrayal, not only by Judas turning Him over to the authorities but also by His closest disciple Peter publicly disowning Him, a well as a brutal flogging and torturous death. He was so anxious that He sweat beads of blood. From the cross, Jesus prayed Psalm 22, which begins with a cry of dereliction, but read on. The tone changes at v. 24: "For he has not despised or abhorred the affliction of the afflicted, and he has not hidden his face from him, but has heard, when he cried to him." David was not forsaken by God, and neither was Christ. The godhead was not divided, and the natures of Christ were not separated.

@@ElasticGiraffe But why did God forsaken him? Jesus said that he could bring an army of angels to rescue him, but he didn't. So why didn't he just die a peaceful death instead of one of the most horrible ways of dying, if we only needed him to resurrect? Also many Christians in the past died terrible deaths, but they sang hymns of joy while they were dying, so it wouldn't make sense that Jesus was so afraid to the point of sweating blood if it was just the fear of suffering death. You said that he "had to die a humiliating death and be numbered among the transgressors" but why if he didn't need to be punished?

Gods justice makes things whole. It heals, sometimes through the destruction of our flesh. It’s nothing to do with a legal issue...we as people perceive things that way if we are under the law in our conscience. He forgives because He loves us. Love doesn’t impute evil. He has never reckoned to us our trespasses to begin with. We were only enemies in our mind. That’s why we have the ministry of reconciliation.

Funny, you could say the same about the retributive crowd. They need their “pound of flesh.”

@@garciacentral Who would you say is the retributive crowd?

Divine justice satisfied.

Ainsley Stevenson beautifully expressed! I agree.

Wow, thanks for putting all that together, Ainsley!

Amen, 1 John also bears witness that love is life and we know God if we love, and along with John 17:3 shows us that age lasting life is knowing God!

God is Love. God is not lawless. God hates sin. God must punish Satan and humans because of sin and lawlessness. God made a way of escape Himself for humanity from eternal punishment through the cross of Christ Jesus, by faith in Christ Jesus and what He accomplished for us....because He so loves us It's wonderful to think and imagine God never getting angry with us or being jealous for us to love Him and not this world because it has been marked for destruction by fire because of our sin. It would be lovely to think about a God who tenderly and lovingly heals people and raises the dead but doesn't cast people into hell. We might not like to think about a God Who once drowned all humanity and creatures, save but a few on the ark....because of their sin. A God Who chose and loved a nation for Christ in time to be born through, but destroyed other nations and people's because of their sin....and also destroyed members of His own chosen people, because of their sin. Jesus is a loving Saviour Who upon His return will give order to separate the wheat from the chaff, the goats from the sheep. Our God who created Hell for the devil and His angels (they didn't get a second chance when they rebelled against God) but enlarged Hell to also contain those from humanity who because of their unbelief in Christ will be cast in there too. A God Who declares that we live then die and then comes our judgement. Who at the great white throne will open the book of life to see who's name from all humanity is written in it and if it's there we will inherit eternal life, but if it's not then we will suffer eternal punishment. Our God is love, our God is Holy, Our God is merciful, forgiving and kind for this reason 'we have sinned and sin is not of God, He hates it and it makes Him angry' He is not like us and is far wiser than us in regards to the righteousness and justice that His throne is founded upon....and cannot be moved. The love of God is seen in Christ Jesus paying for our sin because no one else could pay the cost except God. The wrath of God is seen in His final dealing with sin and all the evil and death that has flowed from it....and we are not without it. Though through Adams sin in the garden all humanity experiences the consequential punishment of that sin which is death to all his descendants, we thank God daily that through the sacrificial obedience of Jesus Christ we can enjoy the incredible and most graciously loving gift of Life eternal by placing our hope and trust in Him🙏🏾

@@merfibeemused You have interpreted scripture through the assumption that God wrote/created his law and imposed it upon us, along with penalties for violation, you have rejected the concept that Gods law is his character therefore he will never harm us. There are two ways to interpret scripture, one where God is the judge who condemns and punishes lawbreakers…this interpretation assumes God created his law therefore lives outside of it (he can break, alter and abolish his law) and the other is where God is the Great Physician who diagnoses and heals us…this interpretation assumes Gods law is his character (hence not one jot or iota can vanish from the law). You use the courtroom God to interpret scripture, I use the Hospital God …both Gods are not one because they oppose each other. The claim in Psalms 119 is that Gods law is equal to God…the law and God are one and the same. If Gods law is Gods character then he cannot break it without becoming a sinner and dying like us. ‘God is love’ and ‘God is life’ therefore Gods law is love and life, when we sin we are out of harmony with love and life, therefore die, God is no longer in us, his law is no longer in us. Without Gods ‘law of love’ living in us we are lawless therefore do not have God nor life. Hence we need healing in order to be saved, Jesus came to ‘heal and save’, we are healed when we have a ‘change of heart’, when we ‘turn from sin’, when Gods law is ‘written on our heart and mind’ (new covenant), that is when we move from death to life. Jesus came to ‘heal’, he did not come to ‘pay’ off our sin with a live innocent human sacrifice blood, he did not come to appease the wrath of God, that is pagan thinking. He did not come to change Gods heart and mind, he came to change our hearts and minds…he did this by revealing the truth about Gods character (God is not lawless) so that we could love and trust him rather than hide in fear…this is why he kept asking, ‘Who do you say I am?’, he needed us to see God through him. If God created his law he is lawless and as you suggest he can behave lawlessly, but I suggest he cannot act outside of his law, he cannot deny himself. You have described a God who is love…except when he burns his enemies in hell, a God who is not lawless…except when he breaks his law by refusing to forgive and love his enemies, a God who hates sin…but is willing to sin (murder, lie) in his response to sin. You assume man is immortal (eternal punishment) even tho scripture says ‘man is mortal’ and ‘God alone is immortal’. In your assumption that God must punish his enemies you deny the concept that sin alone punishes and destroys man, indeed, if sin punishes and kills sinners why would God need to bring them back to life in order to re-punish or re-kill them. Paul in Romans 1 tells us exactly what the "wrath of God’ is and he is in agreement with the entire bible…the ‘wrath of Gods happens when God ‘let’s go’, gives up on them’, ‘turns his back’, ‘gives them over to their own desires’ or ‘abandons them’…God does not lift a finger or think even one thought to harm a single human, not even Satan himself, all he does is stop providing artificial respiration. Jesus was sinless according to the law but you suggest that when he returns he will revoke the forgiveness he once bestowed upon his enemies, he will no longer love and forgive them…this Jesus will become lawless like us…you assume God can change and deny himself. You assume Jesus "paid" for our sin by becoming a live innocent human sacrifice to appease the wrath of God and thus change Gods mind from doing us harm. You assume that when God ‘declares’ us innocent it solves the problem of sin…it doesn’t, a declaration of innocence from God is not a ‘change of heart". ‘We must be born again" to inherit eternal life. If judges in our legal system forgave criminals and set them free the problem of crime would not be solved, but if a healer changed hearts and minds then sin would go into remission. I understand you have merely presented the church’s traditional understanding of the plan of salvation but I’m merely suggesting that it’s a mix of paganism and Christianity, so subtle that it is accepted as if it is completely truth. The Pharisees worshipped a God who killed his enemies hence they had no problem killing Jesus, they did not recognise a God who looked like Jesus. When Paul was converted he went away to re-read scripture under a new light, the light of Jesus which revealed the true character of God. Hence Paul went from worshipping an angry punitive God who led him to kill Christian’s, to worshipping a God like Jesus, giving his life for his enemies. Peter, before he was converted to the God who was revealed in Jesus, cut off the soldier ear, but after he was converted to a law-full God like Jesus, he instead gave his own life as a living sacrifice to his enemies. It makes a difference which God we worship and serve because we become like that which we worship and serve. When Jesus read to Old Testament did he see an unforgiving God who burnt his enemies in pain, suffering, agony and torment throughout all eternity or did he see an innocent God? If Jesus saw a lawless God then Jesus was a liar for representing him as a law-full God and claiming they were ‘one’. I think all Christians, rather than instantly defending their church and tradition, should question the lawless God they worship and serve for he may not be the one and only true God, he may be an imposter, a wolf in sheeps clothing.