Penal substitutionary theory on trial

An interesting theological post by Henry Neufeld on Threads from Henry’s Web who argues the other side against Penal Substitutionary Atonement (PSA), an established atonement theory. He says it has no scriptural basis but many can also show that it does have a strong scriptural basis. Well, PSA was something I’ve always believed in as a basic doctrine and it will be very difficult to disprove it. Personally, I do not think that any of the atonement theories should be exclusive because they all have scriptural basis. Anyways, it’s an interesting post with an argument that makes logical sense, and is fodder for one’s mind.

One thought on “Penal substitutionary theory on trial

  1. “it will be very difficult to disprove it.”
    What about Gen. 9:5? Take a man’s life by bloodshed and the outcome is the requirement by God to account directly to him. The theory of PSA
    ‘s central element is that God does not require an accounting for taking the life of a man by bloodshed.
    What about Jesus saying that unilateral guilt relative to sin will be the remaining outstanding issue AFTER his crucifixion? Jn. 16:8 The theory of PSA says the crucifixion of Jesus has resolved all issues between you and God.
    What about the Acts 2 message and process of resolution AFTER Jesus’ crucifixion? PSA proposes Jesus’ crucifixion is the resolution.
    What about Jesus saying that only a very few people understand why his crucifixion has perfected a very small narrow gate into God’s kingdom? People who think PSA is true are not a few.
    Theodore A. Jones


Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s