Did the Father Punish Jesus?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ruthmary
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Ruthmary

Guest
I don’t know how widespread the idea is, but I have come across the belief that God was punishing Jesus for our sins on the cross. My belief has always been that Jesus offered Himself as the perfect sacrifice. Where does this idea of the Father punishing Jesus come from?
 
The Father and Jesus are one. The Father offered Himself in the Person of Jesus for the sins of the world.
 
jaimeleglise said:
The Father and Jesus are one. The Father offered Himself in the Person of Jesus for the sins of the world.
Click to expand...
The Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are three Divine Persons in One Divine Nature. This is known as the Most Holy Trinity as taught by the Catholic Church.
 
Ruthmary said:
I don’t know how widespread the idea is, but I have come across the belief that God was punishing Jesus for our sins on the cross. My belief has always been that Jesus offered Himself as the perfect sacrifice. Where does this idea of the Father punishing Jesus come from?
Click to expand...
No idea. That’s not a Catholic teaching.
Christ did the will of the Father by becoming the Paschal Lamb.
His will was the redemption of mankind, not a punishment for the Sinless. (Son)
 
I came to Catholicism via a circuitous route through Lutheran/Methodist/Episcopal traditions, and indeed have heard preaching that “Jesus that took the punishment so we don’t have to.” But why did Peter have to? Why did Paul have to? Why did the martyrs throughout history have to? Why are Christians today still suffering for the faith? That teaching just doesn’t hold up. Jesus’ sacrificial act on the cross was redemptive, not a proxy punishment.
 
EricF said:
I came to Catholicism via a circuitous route through Lutheran/Methodist/Episcopal traditions, and indeed have heard preaching that “Jesus that took the punishment so we don’t have to.” But why did Peter have to? Why did Paul have to? Why did the martyrs throughout history have to? Why are Christians today still suffering for the faith? That teaching just doesn’t hold up. Jesus’ sacrificial act on the cross was redemptive, not a proxy punishment.
Click to expand...
Adam could not repair the broken original relationship (Original Sin) between himself and his Divine Creator. Adam is not divine. It is the Divine Creator Who established the original relationship aka State of Original Holiness. Therefore, only a Divine Person could repair it.

The solution is the Incarnation when the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity assumed human nature. In a sense, Jesus stepped into the sandals of Adam so that we could have the benefit of the original relationship between humanity and divinity.
Genesis 3: 15, John 3: 16-17, and 1 Corinthians 15: 54-58
 
I think, and I am no apologist, that our Lord made a sacrifice on our behalf to satisfy divine justice.

After this sacrifice to satisfy divine justice, we were given the right to have our sins forgiven through confession. Even though, God in his mercy now forgives our sins, if we fail to satisfy divine justice through works, prayer, and sacrifices, we satisfy that debt to the last farthing in purgatory.

Our works, and sacrifices, are far more efficacious while still in the church militant, than when in purgatory. We cannot pray for ourselves while in purgatory, which is why the church militant is asked to do so. The answer to your question though, as I understand it, lies in satisfying divine justice.
 
Ruthmary said:
I don’t know how widespread the idea is, but I have come across the belief that God was punishing Jesus for our sins on the cross. My belief has always been that Jesus offered Himself as the perfect sacrifice. Where does this idea of the Father punishing Jesus come from?
Click to expand...
What you mean is when people say that the Father had Jesus killed.

This is incorrect. The father did not punish the Son neither did He send Him to die (He didn’t kill Him).

The fact that it is prophesied that The Messiah would become the Paschal Lamb and God knowing this would happen in advance does not mean that the Father sent the Son to die.

God offered Himself up for the redemption of our sins. But those who killed Him were those that killed Him, and us too. He was ‘betrayed into the hands of sinners’. Who put Him to death on a cross.

Any other understanding than this undermines what He did for us.

The Agony leading to the betrayal was literally Agony - spiritual agony to the “point of death”.
 
EricF said:
I came to Catholicism via a circuitous route through Lutheran/Methodist/Episcopal traditions, and indeed have heard preaching that “Jesus that took the punishment so we don’t have to.” But why did Peter have to? Why did Paul have to? Why did the martyrs throughout history have to? Why are Christians today still suffering for the faith? That teaching just doesn’t hold up. Jesus’ sacrificial act on the cross was redemptive, not a proxy punishment.
Click to expand...
Goodness, there are larger ramifications to this teaching than I realized. So you’re saying that what these people believe is that because Jesus suffered then we don’t have to. You’re right that that doesn’t make sense in the face of the facts and Jesus’ teachings, and that what the Catholic Church teaches follows logic so much more clearly. Those who believe this must have scripture they can quote that they can use to justify their belief. Do you know of any?
 
Ruthmary said:
Goodness, there are larger ramifications to this teaching than I realized. So you’re saying that what these people believe is that because Jesus suffered then we don’t have to. You’re right that that doesn’t make sense in the face of the facts and Jesus’ teachings, and that what the Catholic Church teaches follows logic so much more clearly. Those who believe this must have scripture they can quote that they can use to justify their belief. Do you know of any?
Click to expand...
Jesus freely suffered in order to repair the broken relationship between humanity and Divinity. His obedience gave humanity a second chance to be in a friendship relationship with our Creator God.

Genesis 3: 15, John 3: 16-17, and 1 Corinthians 15: 54-58
 
Ruthmary said:
I don’t know how widespread the idea is, but I have come across the belief that God was punishing Jesus for our sins on the cross. My belief has always been that Jesus offered Himself as the perfect sacrifice. Where does this idea of the Father punishing Jesus come from?
Click to expand...
My understanding is that the crucifixion of Jesus was a sacrifice for the sins of humanity… It occurred on the Passover and Jesus symbolized the sacrificed lamb and the blood that was smeared above the door posts to escape the wrath of God. He released the animals … the doves and sheep that were to be sacrificed as sin offerings in the Temple… thus He became the offering and the temple veil was rent…
 
arthra said:
My understanding is that the crucifixion of Jesus was a sacrifice for the sins of humanity… It occurred on the Passover and Jesus symbolized the sacrificed lamb and the blood that was smeared above the door posts to escape the wrath of God. He released the animals … the doves and sheep that were to be sacrificed as sin offerings in the Temple… thus He became the offering and the temple veil was rent…
Click to expand...
According to the first three sacred chapters of Genesis, originally it is the sin of Adam. There is an old saying that the crucified Jesus opened the gates of heaven.

Genesis 3: 15 is considered the first announcement of the Messiah and Redeemer. (CCC 410-411)

Links to the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition.

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/
 
You are talking about ‘Penal Substitution’. This theory comes from or was made popular by the Protestant Reformation. Calvanists are most especially known for having this view.
 
exnihilo said:
You are talking about ‘Penal Substitution’. This theory comes from or was made popular by the Protestant Reformation. Calvanists are most especially known for having this view.
Click to expand...
Thank you. And thank you to all who posted. You’ve been very helpful.
 
Yes, I believe He did. This concept is laid out in Isaiah 53. The entire chapter sings the melody of Christ; there’s so much wisdom that it’s hard to unpack it all, but I shall quote only the text that is most relevant to this thread. “But he was pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed” (Isaiah 53:5) (quoted from the ESV)

Indeed, we sing in the hymn ‘How great thou art’,
“And when I think of God,
His son not sparing,
Sent Him to die,
I scarce can take it in;
That on the cross, my burden
gladly bearing He bled and died
to take away my sin”

Christ was willing to take on the penalty we deserve. It is for that reason that, when we get to Heaven, we will eternally praise Him for His mighty work. 🙂
 
EricF said:
I came to Catholicism via a circuitous route through Lutheran/Methodist/Episcopal traditions, and indeed have heard preaching that “Jesus that took the punishment so we don’t have to.” But why did Peter have to? Why did Paul have to? Why did the martyrs throughout history have to? Why are Christians today still suffering for the faith? That teaching just doesn’t hold up. Jesus’ sacrificial act on the cross was redemptive, not a proxy punishment.
Click to expand...
Jesus willingly took the punishment for our sins. Being the only sinless One to walk the earth, Jesus’ sacrifice was God’s way of reconciling us to Himself.

There are three main reasons that I can think of for suffering Christians:
  1. God wants those to follow Him because they love Him. Not because they will have a better life. Matthew 5:45
  2. Because sin entered the world, so did suffering and death. Romans 5:12
  3. Because God is working his glory through His children. John 9: 1-3
 
Why not hear Jesus himself on the matter?
"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep. The hired hand is not the shepherd, and the sheep are not his own. When he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away. Then the wolf pounces on them and scatters the flock. The man runs away because he is a hired servant and is unconcerned for the sheep.

"I am the good shepherd. I know My sheep and My sheep know Me, just as the Father knows Me and I know the Father. And I lay down My life for the sheep. I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them in as well, and they will listen to My voice. Then there will be one flock and one shepherd.

"The reason the Father loves Me is that I lay down My life in order to take it up again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of My own accord. I have the authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from My Father.”

So, Jesus says He lays His life down of His own choice, and He has received the command from His Father to do so. So, Jesus gave His life freely, but His Father sent Him to do so.
 
While it’s not the only reason that God became man, it is true that Jesus was punished. Professor Scott Hahn likes to make a distinction between the Catholic understanding and what’s put forth by some Protestant denominations on this. Imagine if you are in court and being held responsible for a fine due to a crime you committed. It is NOT that Jesus walked in and the court changed its mind and convicted Jesus for crimes he didn’t commit, it’s that Jesus came and offered to pay the fine on our behalf. There’s a difference in there. Jesus paid our ransom, our debt.

And the Father never looked at Jesus on the cross in hate, as some stress. The Father loved Jesus, even then, as Jesus loved his Father.
 
Wesrock said:
While it’s not the only reason that God became man, it is true that Jesus was punished. Professor Scott Hahn likes to make a distinction between the Catholic understanding and what’s put forth by some Protestant denominations on this. Imagine if you are in court and being held responsible for a fine due to a crime you committed. It is NOT that Jesus walked in and the court changed its mind and convicted Jesus for crimes he didn’t commit, it’s that Jesus came and offered to pay the fine on our behalf. There’s a difference in there. Jesus paid our ransom, our debt.
Click to expand...
This is oh so legalistic and oh so…bad.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top