This article will be defending the doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement, which teaches that Jesus Christ was punished in the place of sinners, and bore our actual sins, in order to allow us to be justified and reconciled to God.
Readers of this site may be surprised to learn that this is a minority view in Christianity, being rejected by Roman Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox Christians. Other views, such as the Ransom Theory of the Atonement, Satisfaction Theory, and Christus Victor, are distinguished from one another in various ways, but as the focus of this article, they are united in a rejection of the teaching that God punished Jesus for our sins, in our place. Though they may emphasize other true aspects of Christ's atonement, and other true consequences of Christ's death and resurrection, they lack the vital, defining characteristic of Penal Substitutionary Atonement.
The theme of penal substitution permeates the entire Old Testament, where over and over again, animals die because of man's sin.
The first instance of this is in the Garden of Eden, where Adam and Eve are clothed with the skin of animals after they sin (Genesis 3:21). Later, the animal offering of Abel is accepted, while a bloodless one by Cain is not (Genesis 4:2-5). But more than all the offerings before the Law, the principal example of penal substitution is the entire system of animal sacrifices for sins in the Old Testament, in which it is stated:
Leviticus 17:10-11
10 And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.
11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.
Above, notice the emphasis on, and clear teaching of, the concept of blood atonement. Many of the attacks on Penal Substitutionary Atonement are objections to this concept. However, we see extremely early on, that because "the life of the flesh is in the blood", it is blood that God has ordained as a fitting sacrifice for sin, because "the wages of sin is death" (Romans 6:23).
Opponents of the view of Penal Substitutionary Atonement must reckon with why God made sin offering require death in the Old Testament. It's such a defining feature of the Law, that it's restated in the book of Hebrews:
Hebrews 9:22
22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
So, the concept of blood atonement, which involves something innocent - animals in this case - dying for the guilty, is taught from the beginning of the Bible, and consistently thereafter. But, if the blood of animals can make atonement for the sins of mankind, why did Jesus even need to come to earth?
The Bible teaches that in the Old Testament, none of the sacrifices ever actually took away sin:
Hebrews 10:1-5
1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
Above, we see that the reason why there were millions and millions of offerings done in the Old Testament is because they weren't permanent, and they didn't actually atone for anything.
Instead, they served as a shadow of Jesus Christ, who alone was the "Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29):
Hebrews 9:12, 19-26
11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,
20 Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.
21 Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.
22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
Hebrews 10:10-14
10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.
14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
Above, when Jesus Christ actually put His blood on the mercy seat in Heaven (Hebrews 9:11-12, 9:23-24), he ultimately fulfilled everything that the Levitical priesthood was symbolizing - including all of the offerings.
And, what do the above passages clearly teach? Blood atonement - just as we saw under the Law. This is why the New Testament mentions the blood of Jesus Christ, and the many benefits that it purchased us, so frequently (Matthew 26:28, Acts 20:28, Romans 3:25, 5:9-11, Ephesians 1:7, Colossians 1:14, 1:20-22: 1 Peter 1:18-19, Revelation 1:5). It is the atonement for mankind's sin, in the sanctuary of God's justice in Heaven, and it came from an innocent substitute.
Therefore, the fact that the Bible teaches the concept of blood atonement, and the fact that Jesus, the innocent substitute, provided that blood atonement for mankind, is established. However, we still need to establish that in His sacrifice, our sins were actually placed upon Him, and that He actually paid for them.
To begin the crux of this article, it's very important to emphasize that the death of Jesus Christ was not incidental, or just a way to terminate Christ's earthly ministry. It was instead the entire purpose of Jesus coming to earth, and the cornerstone of the entire mission of "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Revelation 13:8):
Hebrews 2:9
9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
Jesus came to earth to die a substitutionary death in place of sinners, and that fact was what was prophesied explicitly in the most famous prophetic chapter in the Old Testament, Isaiah 53:
Isaiah 53:5-12
5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt 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.
11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
Looking at the above, it's simply unbelievable that anyone could reject the doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement. It is taught explicitly, no less than 8 times in 8 verses. Jesus Christ came to bear the sins of sinners, take their iniquity upon himself, and be punished in their place.
Another very clear Old Testament witness to the fact that Jesus actually would bear our sins was the symbolism of the scapegoat (Leviticus 16:5-10, 16:20-22), where once per year the Israelites had to do the following:
Leviticus 16:21-22
21 And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness:
22 And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited: and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness.
"The goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities". This matches exactly the kind of language that would later be written of the Messiah in Isaiah 53. It's impossible to miss.
The New Testament is also unequivocal as a witness to the fact that Jesus Christ actually bore our sins on the cross, exactly as He was prophesied to do:
2 Corinthians 5:21
21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
1 Peter 2:24
24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.
Hebrews 9:28
28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.
1 Corinthians 15:3-4
3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
1 Peter 3:18
18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
Other verses clearly teaching this include Matthew 20:28, Mark 10:45, Romans 3:25, 4:25, Galatians 1:3-4, 3:13: 1 Timothy 2:6, and 1 John 2:2, 4:10.
In the last verse above, that phrase "the just for the unjust" - a theme which underlies so many of the verses that we have looked at - is so important. It's important, because the basis for the rejection of the doctrine of Penal Substitutionary Atonement consists almost entirely of various philosophical rejections of this principle. They essentially argue, using "the wisdom of this world" (1 Corinthians 3:19, Colossians 2:8), that God would never do such a thing as punish "the just for the unjust". Yet, as this article has shown repeatedly, that is the entire crux of God's plan to redeem mankind.
If that goes against philosophical principles of this world, that's perfectly fine. God can choose any means of justification that He sees fit, and if He says that Penal Substitution satisfies justice, then who on earth would dare to disagree? On what basis does a person say He's wrong, beyond a fallible philosophical argument, resting on a far lower authority than the clear witness of Scripture?
In closing, it's important to understand that although Jesus took our sins upon himself, He did not personally become a sinner, nor did those sins become His. They were our sins, imputed to Him, so that He could bear the penalty for them.
Jesus Christ is God. He never sinned, and is utterly sinless (2 Corinthians 5:21, Hebrews 4:15: 1 Peter 2:21-22: 1 John 3:5). He took upon himself the penalty for our sins, but did not himself ever personally deserve judgment, nor was He ever personally guilty of anything, because although our sins were imputed to Him, they were still committed by us.
This distinction is important, because Penal Substitutionary Atonement does not teach in any way that Jesus became less than divine, or personally worthy of judgment. Instead, He made a vicarious atonement, on behalf of others.
In conclusion, the Bible teaches, in both the Old and New Testaments, that God imputed our sins to Jesus Christ, and punished Him in our place, to reconcile us to God.
Very often, this doctrine is attacked as being an invention of John Calvin (1509-1564), being utterly unknown to history prior to him. In reality, many earlier Christian writers taught Penal Substitutionary Atonement, even alongside other views of the atonement. We must keep in mind that views on the atonement aren't all mutually exclusive, and so many of them emphasize true, though distinct, consequences of Christ's death and resurrection.
What follows are some quotes from Church history using language that demonstrates a belief in, and understanding of, penal substitution, leading to our Salvation:
The Epistle of Barnabas 7:3 (70-130 AD)
3 But moreover when crucified He had vinegar and gall given Him to drink. Hear how on this matter the priests of the temple have revealed. Seeing that there is a commandment in scripture, whatsoever shall not observe the fast shall surely die, the Lord commanded, because He was in His own person about to offer the vessel of His Spirit a sacrifice for our sins, that the type also which was given in Isaac who was offered upon the alter should be fulfilled.
The Epistle to Diognetus 9:2-5 (130-310 AD)
2 And when our iniquity had been fully accomplished, and it had been made perfectly manifest that punishment and death were expected as its recompense, and the season came which God had ordained, when henceforth He should manifest His goodness and power (O the exceeding great kindness and love of God), He hated us not, neither rejected us, nor bore us malice, but was long-suffering and patient, and in pity for us took upon Himself our sins, and Himself parted with His own Son as a ransom for us, the holy for the lawless, the guileless for the evil, the just for the unjust, the incorruptible for the corruptible, the immortal for the mortal.
3 For what else but His righteousness would have covered our sins?
4 In whom was it possible for us lawless and ungodly men to have been justified, save only in the Son of God?
5 O the sweet exchange, O the inscrutable creation, O the unexpected benefits; that the iniquity of many should be concealed in One Righteous Man, and the righteousness of One should justify many that are iniquitous!
Eusebius (265-339 AD) - Demonstratio Evangelica, Book 10
And the Lamb of God not only did this, but was chastised on our behalf, and suffered a penalty He did not owe, but which we owed because of the multitude of our sins; and so He became the cause of the forgiveness of our sins, because He received death for us, and transferred to Himself the scourging, the insults, and the dishonour, which were due to us, and drew down on Himself the apportioned curse, being made a curse for us. And what is that but the price of our souls? And so the oracle says in our person: "By his stripes we were healed," and "The Lord delivered him for our sins," with the result that uniting Himself to us and us to Himself, and appropriating our sufferings, He can say, "I said, Lord, have mercy on me, heal my soul, for I have sinned against thee,"
But since being in the likeness of sinful flesh He condemned sin in the flesh, the words quoted are rightly used. And in that He made our sins His own from His love and benevolence towards us,
Hilary of Poitiers (310-367 AD) - Homily on Psalm 53
13 Whoever failed to sacrifice laid himself open to the curse. And it was always necessary to go through the whole sacrificial action because the addition of a curse to the commandment forbad any trifling with the obligation of offering. It was from this curse that our Lord Jesus Christ redeemed us, when, as the Apostle says: Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made curse for us, for it is written: cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree. Thus He offered Himself to the death of the accursed that He might break the curse of the Law, offering Himself voluntarily a victim to God the Father, in order that by means of a voluntary victim the curse which attended the discontinuance of the regular victim might be removed.
Now of this sacrifice mention is made in another passage of the Psalms: Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared for Me; that is, by offering to God the Father, Who refused the legal sacrifices, the acceptable offering of the body which He received. Of which offering the holy Apostle thus speaks: For this He did once for all when He offered Himself up, securing complete salvation for the human race by the offering of this holy, perfect victim.
Athanasius (293-373 AD) - Discourse 1 Against the Arians, Chapter 19
47 For, as when John says, 'The Word was made flesh [John 1:14],' we do not conceive the whole Word Himself to be flesh, but to have put on flesh and become man, and on hearing, 'Christ has become a curse for us,' and 'He has made Him sin for us who knew no sin,' we do not simply conceive this, that whole Christ has become curse and sin, but that He has taken on Him the curse which lay against us (as the Apostle has said, 'Has redeemed us from the curse,' and 'has carried,' as Isaiah has said, 'our sins,' and as Peter has written, 'has borne them in the body on the wood');
Gregory of Nazianzus (329-390 AD) - Oration 30
5 But look at it in this manner: that as for my sake He was called a curse, Who destroyed my curse; and sin, who takes away the sin of the world; and became a new Adam to take the place of the old, just so He makes my disobedience His own as Head of the whole body.
Ambrose of Milan (339-397 AD) - Flight From the World, Chapter 7
44 And so then, Jesus took flesh that he might destroy the curse of sinful flesh, and He became for us a curse that a blessing might overwhelm a curse, uprightness might overwhelm sin, forgiveness might overwhelm the sentence, and life might overwhelm death. He also took up death that the sentence might be fulfilled and satisfaction might be given for judgment, the curse placed on sinful flesh even to death. Therefore, nothing was done contrary to God's sentence when the terms of that sentence were fulfilled, for the curse was unto death but grace is after death.
Augustine (354-430 AD) - Contra Faustum, Book 14
6 But as Christ endured death as man, and for man; so also, Son of God as He was, ever living in His own righteousness, but dying for our offenses, He submitted as man, and for man, to bear the curse which accompanies death. And as He died in the flesh which He took in bearing our punishment, so also, while ever blessed in His own righteousness, He was cursed for our offenses, in the death which He suffered in bearing our punishment.
Augustine (354-430 AD) - On Faith, Hope, and Love, Chapter 33
Now, as men were lying under this wrath by reason of their original sin, and as this original sin was the more heavy and deadly in proportion to the number and magnitude of the actual sins which were added to it, there was need for a Mediator, that is, for a reconciler, who, by the offering of one sacrifice, of which all the sacrifices of the law and the prophets were types, should take away this wrath. Wherefore the apostle says: For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.
All of these quotations are over 1,000 years before John Calvin. So, the argument that this doctrine is ahistorical does not withstand the scrutiny of Church history.