Substitutionary Atonement

[MarcoPolo]

If I understand Substitutionary Atonement correctly, it is the belief that when Christ went through His Passion, this was the sum-total of the penalty that was accrued by mankind throughout all of history. Is that correct?

And if that is correct, wouldn’t Jesus have to be eternally punished in order to experience the total penalty accrued by mankind?

 

[kimmielittle]

And if that is correct, wouldn’t Jesus have to be eternally punished in order to experience the total penalty accrued by mankind?

By who’s time? We can only define time as we know it AND we will never be without sin as Jesus was. For Him to take this on for us…How can we, as sinners, measure? Or truly understand the price?

I’m asked to accept what Jesus did for me, not measure it. Jesus knows it is beyond my reason.

As always, just my thoughts

 

[BerhaneSelassie]

My understanding is that Christ’s death was to appease the wrath of the Father, by His death it became possible for our sins to be forgiven.

Do not confuse the it with the heresy of “penal substitution” which has it that Christ suffered the equivalent of several eternities in hell in 3 days (no idea how that could be 3day=countless infinities, if that’s the case then it could potentially lead to the apokatasis heresy). Regardless, if Christ were to have paid the penalty as some Protestants see it, then Christ would logically still be in hell, and it would be impossible to lose salvation, since it would not be fair to punish someone for something already paid.

 

[DavidFilmer]

If I understand Substitutionary Atonement correctly, it is the belief that when Christ went through His Passion, this was the sum-total of the penalty that was accrued by mankind throughout all of history. Is that correct?

No, that is not correct. The merits of Christ’s Passion are infinite (and are not limited to whatever is necessary to balance mankind’s sins). The sins of mankind are vast, but still finite.

And if that is correct, wouldn’t Jesus have to be eternally punished in order to experience the total penalty accrued by mankind?

Jesus offered an infinite retribution once, for all. This is sufficient to satisfy any debt that mankind could ever possibly accrue.

 

[Trishie]

Hell is existence without God’s love and light and as Jesus is God He cannot be without God’s light and love. He who is God cannot reject God. Hell is not so much the punishment as the consequence. It is experienced as punishment, but is the logical consequence of rejecting the God of light and love. Without God’s love and light, all is left is the absence of both, which is torment.

 

[Philthy]

If I understand Substitutionary Atonement correctly, it is the belief that when Christ went through His Passion, this was the sum-total of the penalty that was accrued by mankind throughout all of history. Is that correct?

And if that is correct, wouldn’t Jesus have to be eternally punished in order to experience the total penalty accrued by mankind?

Yup. There was a great thread on this not too long ago…I’ll see if I can find it. Here it is:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=339098
Be sure to read Guanophore’s stuff…

 

[jackregnier]

If I understand Substitutionary Atonement correctly, it is the belief that when Christ went through His Passion, this was the sum-total of the penalty that was accrued by mankind throughout all of history. Is that correct?

And if that is correct, wouldn’t Jesus have to be eternally punished in order to experience the total penalty accrued by mankind?

Yes, Jesus suffered spiritual death because remember at the agony, He askerd the Father why He had forsaken Him. In other words, He was separated from His Father. But when He descended into hell or Hades, Satan found out He had no legal right to be there. If Satan would have known this, he wouldn’t have allowed Jesus to diie on the cross. Now, the enemy is a defeated foe, but how many know that.
Peace, Jack

 

[MarcoPolo]

He askerd the Father why He had forsaken Him. In other words, He was separated from His Father. But when He descended into hell or Hades, Satan found out He had no legal right to be there.

Whoever told you this was mistaken. Jesus was quoting Psalm 22:1 when He said He felt “forsaken”. He was not, nor can He be separated from the Father, for the Trinity is One, indivisible, immutable. He also did not go to the hell of the damned where Satan dwells. He went to preach to “spirits in prison,” (1 Peter 3) traditionally known as a holding place for those who died prior to His Passion.

 

[MarcoPolo]

Jesus offered an infinite retribution once, for all. This is sufficient to satisfy any debt that mankind could ever possibly accrue.

What I’m saying, is not the punishment that mankind deserves eternal? So if Jesus is taking on our punishment (whether superabundant or not), should it not be eternal according to the idea of Substitutionary Atonement?

 

[Trishie]

“He has…offered one single sacrifice for sins, and then taken his place forever, ‘at the right hand of God,’ where he is now waiting until his enemies are made into a footstool for Him. By…that single offering, He has achieved the eternal perfection of all whom He is sanctifying.” [Hebrews 10:11-15]

Catechism of the Catholic Church

2749 Jesus fulfilled the work of the Father completely; his prayer, like his sacrifice, extends until the end of time. The prayer of this hour fills the end-times and carries them toward their consummation. Jesus, the Son to whom the Father has given all things, has given himself wholly back to the Father, yet expresses himself with a sovereign freedom by virtue of the power the Father has given him over all flesh. The Son, who made himself Servant, is Lord, the Pantocrator. Our high priest who prays for us is also the one who prays in us and the God who hears our prayer.

517 Christ’s whole life is a mystery of redemption. Redemption comes to us above all through the blood of his cross,[179] but this mystery is at work throughout Christ’s entire life: -already in his Incarnation through which by becoming poor he enriches us with his poverty;[180] - in his hidden life which by his submission atones for our disobedience;[181] - in his word which purifies its hearers;[182]- in his healings and exorcisms by which “he took our infirmities and bore our diseases”;[183] - and in his Resurrection by which he justifies us.[184]

 

[Trishie]

Substitionary atonement is not a scriptural term, but a red herring, hiding the true nature of the question.
Jesus did not have to sin, which is a human misery. He didn’t have to kill anyone, to be impure, to commit any other sin that makes human beings miserable. If you use the concept in the way you are, you will have to extend Jesus’ action to taht also, but you really need to look at what scripture actually says about redemption, not get hung up on such words as you are using.

I repeat, God cannot be not God, God cannot reject God. Jesus who is truly God and truly man, would have to be what He is not. Hell is existence without God’s love and light and as Jesus is God He cannot be without God’s light and love. He who is God cannot reject God. Hell is not so much the punishment as the consequence. It is experienced as punishment, but is the logical consequence of rejecting the God of light and love. Without God’s love and light, all is left is the absence of both, which is torment.

Catechism of the Catholic Church

518 … All Jesus did, said and suffered had for its aim restoring fallen man to his original vocation: When Christ became incarnate and was made man, he recapitulated in himself the long history of mankind and procured for us a “short cut” to salvation, so that what we had lost in Adam, that is, being in the image and likeness of God, we might recover in Christ Jesus.(185) For this reason Christ experienced all the stages of life, thereby giving communion with God to all men.

“Christ has come, as the great high priest of all blessings…and offered Himself as **the perfect sacrifice to God through the eternal Spirit [purifying] our inner self from dead actions **so that we do our service to the living God. He brings a new covenant, as the mediator, only so that the people who were called to an eternal inheritance may actually receive what was promised: His death took place to cancel the sins that infringed the earlier covenant.” [Hebrews 9:11, 14-15]

 

[MarcoPolo]

Substitionary atonement is not a scriptural term, but a red herring, hiding the true nature of the question.

I was never embracing the term myself. I think CCC#2749 answers it though. Thx.

 

[DavidFilmer]

What I’m saying, is not the punishment that mankind deserves eternal?

Indeed.

So if Jesus is taking on our punishment (whether superabundant or not), should it not be eternal according to the idea of Substitutionary Atonement?

No.

Suppose I owe a debt of a single penny, and my lender charges me a paltry 1% per anum. This is a small debt, with generous terms. But, alas, I have no money to pay, so after an infinity of time, my debt grows to infinity.

But, if a benefactor shows up, at any time, with an infinity of money to pay my debt on my behalf, then the debt is paid in full at that time. An infinity of money will pay (in full) an infinity of debt. Afterward, there is no further interest, and no further debt.

Once the debt is paid, the impediment to eternal life is eliminated.

It does not matter if my debt is a penny or a dollar (or a trillion dollars), or if it is just me, or a trillion people. The aggregate debt is still infinite, and the benefactor offers an infinite payment, which fully redeems the debt, in full.

(anybody who wishes to toss George Cantor (et al) into this line of reasoning - feel free to do so. I am, after all, first and foremost a mathematician, and would love to expound on how the merits of Christ are actually a higher order of infinity than the infinity of the sins of man - aleph-infinity, so to speak - an infinity of infinite cardinality)

 

[kimmielittle]

He askerd the Father why He had forsaken Him. In other words, He was separated from His Father.

Hiyas Jack

I was taught Jesus was crying out for Israel. Like, Why has Israel been forsaken.

 

[Trishie]

Yes, Jesus suffered spiritual death because remember at the agony, He askerd the Father why He had forsaken Him. In other words, He was separated from His Father. But when He descended into hell or Hades, Satan found out He had no legal right to be there. If Satan would have known this, he wouldn’t have allowed Jesus to diie on the cross. Now, the enemy is a defeated foe, but how many know that.

Peace,   Jack

Hi Jack

May I say that Jesus was never separated from the Father, but endured as we do at times, the pain of feeling abandoned, “For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses”. Hebrews 4:15} The fact that we feel abandoned in our worst times of suffering does not mean God has abandoned us.
Jesus who is God, Son of God, Incarnate, cannot be separated from God as He is God as well as man.

God’s kind blessings to you.

 

[jackregnier]

Hi Jack

May I say that Jesus was never separated from the Father, but endured as we do at times, the pain of feeling abandoned, “For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses”. [Hebrews 4:15} The fact that we feel abandoned in our worst times of suffering does not mean God has abandoned us.
Jesus who is God, Son of God, Incarnate, cannot be separated from God as He is God as well as man.

God’s kind blessings to you.

When Adam sinned, he suffered spiritual death, and as a result without Jesus sacrifice, mankind suffered spiritual death, which means separated from God. Jesus had to turn this around, as He is called the second Adam. This is why we must be born again. We do this by accepting Him as our Lord and Savior ( Romans 10:9-10).

Peace,   Jack

[/quote]

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

Marco, Penal substitution is a Protestant heresy, and I am sure you are already dicovering the inherent contradiction proposed by such a theory. Christ’s death is a propitiation. I can link you to my 15 page post on the Euchaist if you wish, the first few pages covers this indepth.

 

[BerhaneSelassie]

St Augustine:

“…the first verse of which the Lord Himself uttered on the Cross: “My God, My God, look upon Me; why have You forsaken Me?” For “transferring us in a figure” [1 Corinthians 4:6] to what He was saying, and to His own Body (for we are also “His Body,” and He is our “Head”), He uttered from the Cross not His own cry, but ours. For God never “forsook” Him: nor did He Himself ever depart from the Father; but it was in behalf of us that He spoke this: “My God, My God, why have you forsaken Me?” For there follows, “Far from My health are the words of My offences:” and it shows in whose person He said this; for sin could not be found in Him.…”–Exposition on Psalm 44

Catechism:

Jesus did not experience reprobation as if he himself had sinned.(405) But in the redeeming love that always united him to the Father, he assumed us in the state of our waywardness of sin, to the point that he could say in our name from the cross: "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"(406) Having thus established him in solidarity with us sinners, God "did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all", so that we might be "reconciled to God by the death of his Son".(407)--CCC 603

To say there was a separation for a time between the Father and the Son is to do damage to the unity of the Trinity

 

[MarcoPolo]

Marco, Penal substitution is a Protestant heresy, and I am sure you are already dicovering the inherent contradiction proposed by such a theory. Christ’s death is a propitiation. I can link you to my 15 page post on the Euchaist if you wish, the first few pages covers this indepth.

Yes, please link.

 

[FCEGM]

Here are two articles on the subject at The Catholic Legate:

catholic-legate.com/articles/cathatonement.html

The conception of Christ’s atonement is a central issue which separates Catholic (and Eastern Orthodox) Christians from the heretical Protestants, who misunderstand both the Lord’s Incarnation and the all-loving nature of God. Namely, we do not believe, and it is a BIG mistake to believe, that God the Father demanded the cruel torture and death of His only Beloved Son --the worse sin mankind ever committed. No. God the Father does not demand sin. God the Father is not some wrathful “Germanic sky god” (e.g. Odin), and He did not demand the death of Jesus so as to satisfy some sense of ‘wrathful justice.’ To believe this (as most Protestants do) is a form of Arianism, in that it makes the loving nature of Jesus something distinct from the “wrathful and just” nature of the Father. Rather, the Father is “one in Being with the Son,” and He did not demand the cruel torture and death of the Son. Rather, WE are the ones who demanded the cruel torture and death of Jesus. The Father merely demanded that Jesus go to the ultimate human extent of loving us (i.e., “Greater love has no man than to lay down his life for those he loves.”)… . .Mark Bonocore

catholic-legate.com/articles/atonement.html

. . .God was not so angry with the world that He had to beat up on someone (i.e., Jesus). Rather, He loved it so much that He sent His Son to save it. This work made forgiveness possible so that he could “remember our sins no more.” Jesus saved us from the punishments of sin and death not by being punished in our place by acting on our behalf. Jesus did the will of the Father even to the point of immolation by evil and jealous men at the behest of demonic powers. He persevered as a perfectly good man even in the face of temptation, torture, and death without loosing ‘faith’ in God or the resolve to “do the will of the Father.”. . . Dr. Art Sippo