The belief that God punished Jesus in our place advocates that there was a behind the scenes exchange between God and Jesus, whereby Jesus suffered rejection from God, and/or experienced God’s wrath. The premise of this view is that the physical death of Jesus at the hands of sinful men was not sufficient for our salvation, and something more was needed, namely divine punishment, or else the cross would not have been efficacious in saving us. Jesus had to suffer spiritually under God’s condemnation in some manner. There had to be an exchange.
When I began to deal with this ideology within my own beliefs, it took quite some time to work through all the verses that seem to support it. If Jesus didn’t suffer condemnation from God, what is the meaning of Paul when he says that Jesus was made a curse for us, and Isaiah when he says, it pleased the Lord to bruise him.
I remember toiling over what Paul said, and how I understood it, as I was embracing what Jesus had taught his disciples. When I began to embrace and teach what Jesus had taught the men he trained as apostles, my understanding of the gospel grew tremendously.
Interestingly, I have found that when I present the cross from the vantage point of what Jesus said, and what his first apostles taught, I have two completely different responses from Christians. When online, Christians can get very defensive towards me, and almost reject me as a heretic or a false teacher. In person, I have had a different experience, especially if it’s in a class setting.
About 3 months ago, a fellow who doesn’t know me, took it upon himself to rebuke me in an online setting, and among other things, he wrote the following:
I perceive that you are earnest in your desire for truth and refutation of error. As you, yourself, know, it is a fearful thing to undertake to teach God’s word to others and those who do will be held to stricter judgment. Given this, I would be remiss if I didn’t entreat you to earnestly reconsider what you are teaching others with regard to the atonement of Christ, lest at the last you find yourself on the wrong side of truth.
If believing the words of Jesus, which now stands as the foundation of all I teach about the cross, can put me on the wrong side of truth, then that’s a chance I will just have to take. I’d rather my understanding of the cross of Christ be developed by what Jesus and his apostles said, rather than what Calvin or Luther said.
His comment to me is not unusual. It’s typical of the replies I have received from people online. I once had another person on social media express their disapproval when I stated that Jesus had been murdered. Yet this is exactly what Stephen said in Acts 7 when he told the Jewish religious authorities that they had been betrayers and murders of the Just One.
He had an issue with me describing the death of Jesus exactly as Stephen in scripture had. Now, think about that. Let that resonate for a moment. His view of the cross made him think that I was off the mark because I described the cross as Stephen had.
How is it that we can all know that Judas betrayed Jesus into the hands of sinful men who had been plotting to kill him and not understand that Jesus’s death was a murder? How is it that we don’t get honest with ourselves and question our theological views and ask the question, If Jesus was murdered, and he was, how does this satisfy the justice of God?
If Jesus’s crucifixion resulted from his being betrayed, and it would have been better for Judas to have never been born than to betray Jesus, how does this involve the justice of God’s against Jesus?
These are the kind of questions I asked myself as I was unlearning some of the erroneous things I had embraced in my theological view. I have for a long time held to the opinion that you have no basis for doctrine until all the scriptures, or at least the majority of the scriptures on the topic, harmonize.
Now, my experience with people in person (in conversations and in class settings) have been quite different from online forums, because in person, I can walk them through the scriptures and show them exactly what Jesus and his original apostles said. I can also show them what Paul actually preached and how Paul’s gospel is the same as that declared by Jesus and the original apostles. Without fail, they jump on board with me because the scriptures convince them.
Once, while teaching a Bible School class in London, I taught this very topic. I am better at communicating as a preacher/teacher in person than I am as a writer. Anyway, during the first hour, I challenged some of the beliefs that many of us have long held, including myself. As we took a break between the first and second hour, there was a buzz among the students.
When we began the second hour, I took them through the scriptures, beginning with Jesus and continuing through the sermons preached in Acts. Somewhere in the process (it didn’t take very long), they were all on board. I don’t remember a single one of them not jumping on board with me. I can say with confidence that it was probably the first time someone had ever taken them through the narrative and showed them exactly what Jesus said about his death and what the apostles preached. As I was teaching, a lady suddenly overcome with the joy of the truth she was seeing from scripture, abruptly blurted out “where (or how) did you learn all this?!”
That is what revelation of the truth does. It causes a rejoicing in the heart at the discovery of truth, and it nurtures a desire for more. This was happening to her in that class.
So how did I learn this? Well, I had been a student of the cross for many years. The emphasis of my teachings for much of my ministry had been the blood of Jesus and the cross. My heart’s desire was to understand the power of the blood of Jesus. As a young man, I had some serious struggles, and there came a point when I knew that my victory over those struggles would come as I developed strong through faith in the blood of Christ. It’s somewhat of a long story, so I won’t go into it here, but I began a journey of studying, praying, and listening to anyone who had any sort of understanding about the cross and the blood of Christ.
The most influential minister in my journey became the writings of Andrew Murray (I won’t go into how Murray’s writings helped me here), but suffice to say, I flourished in my understanding after being introduced to his writings.
As I continued on my journey I heard a Bible scholar, whom I have come to absolutely love, say something that I have never heard anyone else say. He was commenting about a particular book that had come out, which apologetically defended the theological view of the cross known as Penal Substitutionary Atonement. I had a copy of the book, and still have it.
He made the observation that these authors (it was co-authored), had cited this theologian, and that theologian, and even had cited Paul, but they had given very little attention to Jesus. And he made the comment, “What did Jesus say about his death?”
In roughly 20 years of study, and preaching, and teaching about the cross, I had never seriously considered what Jesus said, other than the verses from the Last Supper, and the references of giving his life as a ransom. I didn’t place much emphasis on Jesus’s description of his death. In fact, I didn’t even think that Jesus had anything of real importance to say because he didn’t address the behind the scenes narrative that so many of us tend to embrace. Like many people, I thought that Paul, and pretty much Paul alone, was the expert who had the spiritual insight into what happened at the cross.
I think my beliefs had been greatly influenced by the theology of E.W. Kenyon who is considered by many as father of the Word of Faith Movement. As a young man, I embraced the teachings of the Word of Faith movement, and Kenyon was held in high esteem as having great spiritual insights among the leading WOF ministers. Kenyon did have some good teachings, but he is also had some bad teachings, mixing metaphysics with the teachings of scripture.
Allow me to share with you a portion of what Kenyon taught about the cross, and as you read it, be honest and ask yourself if you interpret scripture similarly. I am not talking about the conclusion Kenyon came to, but how he got there. Below is a brief excerpt from Kenyon’s teachings taken from his book – The Bible in the Light of Our Redemption. I had a copy of this book (I may still have it), and I copied the following myself. I have added capps for emphasis only.
Kenyon states the following:
The disciples knew THE MEANING of the Crucifixion of Christ, his burial, and his resurrection, ONLY THROUGH THEIR PHYSICAL SENSES. They saw the beating of Christ; they saw the nails driven into his hands and feet. They heard his words, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me.” They saw and handled his body in the process of embalming it, as it was laid away for burial. They saw the stone rolled away from the tomb and the empty grave clothes. They saw and handled the resurrected body of Christ. They saw him ascend into heaven.This physical knowledge, however, gave them NO INSIGHT INTO THE MEANING OF THE SPIRITUAL SIGNIFICANCE of Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. In the crucifixion of Christ, they saw only his physical suffering. THEY KNEW NOTHING of the spiritual suffering of Christ as HIS SPIRIT was made sin. THEY KNEW NOT where Christ’s spirit was or what he was doing during the time his physical body lay in the tomb. THEY KNEW NOTHING of the conquering of Satan by Christ in his resurrection. THEY KNEW NOTHING of the ascension of Christ with his own blood into the Holy of Holies. THEY KNEW NOTHING of the ministry of Christ at the Father’s right hand AFTER HE LEFT THEM.
Now, don’t focus on the conclusions Kenyon reached about what he thought Paul understood. This is not why I shared what Kenyon said. I want you to take note of how he read the scriptures.
Kenyon read the scriptures as if the disciples who walked with Jesus didn’t know what they were talking about on a spiritual level when they testified of the death of Jesus. Kenyon even implies they didn’t understand the resurrection on a spiritual level.
Now, consider the following statement I recently copied from someone else, and notice how he reads the New Testament, much like Kenyon, even though he likely comes to a different conclusion.
The “preaching of the cross” was the distinctive message of the Apostle Paul. It was the gospel he preached, that Christ died for our sins and rose from the dead for our salvation ( 1 Corinthians 15:1-4). Paul’s gospel was faith + 0. Neither the Twelve nor the other writers of the New Testament preached this gospel until they learned about it from Paul. And, as a result, Paul’s gospel, his “preaching of the cross,” precipitated a great crisis among the Jewish leadership in Jerusalem that resulted in the Council of Jerusalem (c. 51 A.D.) The goal of this study is to examine Paul’s message and how it was unique to his ministry as the “apostle to the Gentiles.”
Notice that this author actually says, Neither the Twelve nor the other writers of the New Testament preached this gospel until they learned about it from Paul.
Well, what in the world were they preaching in Acts then?!
If the apostles didn’t preach the gospel, then they would have been false apostles. In fact Peter stood up at the Jerusalem council and said, God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
Paul wasn’t the first to take the gospel to the Gentiles, Peter was. Peter was sent to Cornelius’s house in Acts 10 (at that time Paul was testifying to the Jews), and Peter preached the very same message about Jesus to Cornelius’s house as he had been preaching since the Day of Pentecost. He preached the gospel message he learned from Jesus, not Paul!
It is absolutely absurd to think that the original apostles did not understand what the gospel was until they heard it from Paul.
This is why it is so important how we read scripture. I tend to think that If a lot of Christians were to be brutally honest, they would have to admit they sort of read the New Testament through the same lens as Kenyon and the other fellow cited above. They would have to admit their thinking about the cross has been shaped along similar lines.
So I ask you, what did Jesus say about his death, and does it matter for us today? Are the words of Jesus, and what he told his disciples about his death, which the disciples preached in Acts, important?
If I were to ask you to stop what you are doing right now and tell me what Jesus had to say about his death both before and after his resurrection, what would you tell me? Could you share the truth of the gospel with another person using only what Jesus said about his death?
Furthermore, would you have a greater appreciation and a greater understanding of the resurrection if you considered more earnestly what Jesus said? Knowing what I know now, I would say yes! You would. The resurrection takes on a whole new and more glorious meaning when Jesus’s words become the foundation of how you interpret the cross. The gospel preached in Acts by Peter, and Stephen are an extension of what Jesus said.
I can honestly say that I can now stand up anywhere, and teach on the cross from any text that references the cross, and not contradict because the whole counsel of scripture on this topic harmonizes in my understanding. I don’t say this to brag, God forbid, but I have worked through the texts and now every scripture I know of in the gospels, in Acts, in Paul’s writings, and the rest of the New Testament, all harmonize, and I can’t find an angry God who used Judas and the chief priests to do his outward dirty work, anywhere.
At the cross, it was grace that saved us, not wrath being satisfied. Paul even tells us in Titus, that after the kindness and love of God our Savior toward man appeared, he saved us.
It truly is a wonderful, and joyous experience to be able to preach the truth of the gospel form Isaiah 53, Psalm 22, anywhere in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Acts, along with Romans 3- 6, Galatians 3, 1 Peter 2, the book of Hebrews, Ephesians, Colossians, and anywhere else we read about the cross and have the truth of the scriptures harmonize.
I am not saying I have perfect understanding, or that I have a complete grasp on all that scripture teaches about Christ’s redemption (there is so much to learn and to glean). I will never learn it all in this life. I continue to grow. I have more to learn than I currently know.
What I am saying is I now have an understanding of the cross in which the whole counsel of scripture does harmonize. I don’t have to ignore what Peter preached on the Day of Pentecost, or what Stephen preached in Acts 7, because those texts harmonize with what Paul said to the Ephesians.
Paul’s word’s where he declares that Jesus was made a curse for us, and our old man is crucified with Christ now harmonizes with the narrative that Jesus died an unjust death at the hands of sinful men. I don’t have to ignore what Jesus and the original apostles said because of what I think Paul said.
Thank you for listening, and I hope that what I have written will provoke you in a good way. Blessings.