Christ, Our Substitute

This sermon is from Grace Fellowship Church in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. To access other sermons or to learn more about us, please visit our website at graceedmonton .ca.

The Opening Challenge to Penal Substitutionary Atonement

Today we're looking now at the opening verses in Mark chapter 15, verses 1 through 20. And I've done it a few times here recently. I want to begin our time again today by looking at a quote. In this instance, at least an unfriendly quote, perhaps towards what we would normally view as being orthodox and true and right.

And it's a quote from an author named Brian Zond. He's the founder and lead pastor of a church called the Word of Life Church in St. Joseph, Missouri. He's perhaps best known in his circles for writing a book called Sinners in the Hands of a Loving God.

Now right from the title you might begin to grasp that he might not be fond of some of the same doctrines that we are fond of. Perhaps a doctrine like penal substitutionary atonement. But he's quoted as saying this.

He says, Particularly abhorrent is the penal substitutionary theory of atonement. It turns the Father of Jesus into a pagan deity who can only be placated by the barbarism of child sacrifice. Now tell us how you really feel, Mr. Zond.

But what Peter goes on to do here, or Brian Zond, excuse me, what he goes on to do is to lay out a case against penal substitutionary atonement. He is no friend of the idea that Christ went to the cross as a substitute to pay the penalty for man's sin.

He would go so far as to say, and this is a bit of a paraphrase of what he has said, that the God of penal substitutionary atonement, who is mollified, that's his word, not mine, think of Moloch, who is mollified by his son being nailed to a tree.

It's like a God who is mollified by a virgin being thrown into a volcano. And he likens such an Abba Father to a cosmic child abuser, a maniacal bloodthirsty beast who deserves no worship from God's people.

Now we might listen to this and nod our heads and agree that this sounds rather radical, at least from the perspective that many of us would take. But I believe that more and more this doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement is coming under increased attacks, both from theologically liberal camps, where we might expect it to appear, but also in so-called conservative churches in the broader Christian community.

Just a few weeks ago, you might remember, I alluded to a story of a brother, a dear brother of mine, who for many years I enjoyed sweet Christian fellowship with, and we would go to White Avenue together.

And he devoted much of his life, at least for the last decade or so, to preaching the gospel of Christ dying on the cross for sinners. Here on the street corners in Edmonton. And then he traveled down through the United States, and then eventually into Mexico, preaching that Christ died for sinners.

And then just a few years ago, we had a conversation, and he said to me that he no longer believed that, but that he held to a different view. That certainly Christ did die, but not to take man's penalty for sin.

Not to absorb the wrath of God on man's behalf. A man who seemed to love the gospel more than most people that I had ever met had abandoned the core message of the gospel after just a few months of research on the internet.

Now, this brother, I hope and pray to God that he is a believer still, despite his gross error. But this is happening more and more and more amongst professing Christians in the world. And in the place of penal substitutionary atonement, we've seen a number of new theories that have popped up.

Normally in an introduction, you don't introduce a whole bunch of new information, but as I introduce our topic today, we'll look at them just for a moment so we can begin to grasp the layout of the land.

Perhaps most popular in the so-called Christian world is the theory of Christus Victor, a theory that has been favored by many Eastern Orthodox churches. And it relies heavily on passages like Colossians 2 and verse 15.

If you're taking notes, I'm going to list off a bunch of these. Where it says that Christ disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame by triumphing over them in him. And what Christus Victor teaches, instead of penal substitutionary atonement, is that Christ triumphed over everything that stands in man's way from being one with God.

So it's an alternate view of the atonement. Another popular view that I visited a couple weeks ago was the ransom theory of atonement. And this is closely related to Christus Victor. Many Christus Victor believers would also believe in the ransom theory.

And what they believe is that Jesus Christ died as a ransom sacrifice to pay off Satan. To pay Satan and to buy Christians back from the devil. Now some of you might be wide-eyed at that notion, but this is a very popular belief, supported by and encouraged and promoted by mainstream thinkers.

C .S. Lewis, for instance. I love the Chronicles of Narnia, but C .S. Lewis was a subscriber to the ransom theory. And that's why if you've ever seen The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, the noble lion Aslan dies, not to placate himself, but to pay off the white witch in place of the devil.

To pay a ransom for one who had sinned. So we have Christus Victor. We have the ransom theory. Also in the world today, increasing in strength, is the moral influence theory. And that probably is exactly as it sounds.

That Christ came to this world not to die for sinners. Not even necessarily to go to the cross, but to be an example for us to follow. A moral example. And the call of the Christian is not to believe on Christ, but to simply live in the same way that Christ lived on their quest for eternal life.

And then lastly, and perhaps most subtly, there are theories like the governmental theory. And this theory, which has been historically held by Methodists, a now largely liberal denomination, appears to be very close to penal substitutionary atonement, but is altogether different.

Like looking at two cities on a map. They're only inches apart, but in reality they're a thousand miles away from each other. And the idea of the governmental theory is that when Christ went to the cross, he died to demonstrate God's wrath for sin, but not necessarily to pay for God's wrath for sin.

You can hear that. It sounds close, but it's very different. To put it another way, Christ suffered a punishment for sin, but not your punishment for sin. That is the governmental theory. And perhaps at this point, already some of you, your heads are spinning.

You might even be asking, what is penal substitutionary atonement? What are we comparing all these ideas to? And I think that demonstrates an important point that with all of these theories floating around and with greater and greater attacks on the doctrine of the penal substitutionary death of Christ, even being embraced by big names and featured in books and Hollywood movies, many of us might be left asking, which theory are we to believe?

Are all theories created equal? Is penal substitutionary atonement what we teach in this church, what I am going to lay forward for us today? Is it in fact true? Is it true beyond the shadow of a doubt?

Can we bet our eternity on it? Or is it just another theory in a buffet of theories? And we can pick and choose the ones that we like and sound good. And if you like penal substitutionary atonement, you can pick that one too.

Today, our passage is going to answer that question fully and finally. What was Christ doing, brothers and sisters, when he went to that cross? And my hope and my prayer, I think it's the hope and prayer of every preacher when they get behind the pulpit and open their Bible is that you, brothers and sisters, would be enriched and encouraged by the truth of the gospel, that you would see Christ.

And so as we work our way through, ask yourself, is this the gospel? And do I believe it? And we'll get to the end, what that means for you. So join with me. Let's turn to Mark chapter 15, and we're going to read verses 1 through 5.

And we read this. This is God's holy word. And as soon as it was morning, the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council, and they bound Jesus and led him away and delivered him over to Pilate.

And Pilate asked him, are you the king of the Jews? And he answered him, you have said so. And the chief priests accused him of many things. And Pilate again asked him, have you no answer to make? See how many charges they bring against you.

But Jesus made no further answer. So the Pilate was amazed. Today I've broken up this particular sermon and study into three different sections. Sometimes I will give you points of application as the titles, but we're actually going to look at the features of each of these sections.

And so the first section that we're going to look at, and maybe like a good Baptist preacher, I've alliterated today. We're going to look at the praetorium, the pardon, and the penal substitute. We're first going to look at the praetorium.

But to frame our text. Last week, you'll remember that we heard the torment that Jesus Christ endured at the hands of the Sanhedrin, at the residence of the high priest, whose name is Caiaphas. And this week, as we begin chapter 15, we're returning to that scene.

The night now has passed. The rooster has crowed, and it's now Friday morning. If you're reading in the NIV, you'll read that it says very early in the morning. I think that's an accurate translation.

It was probably five or six in the morning, right at dawn, on the very first Good Friday. And this, for some of us, ought to come with a sense of realization that we have been, for the entire duration of the Gospel of Mark, working our way towards this cataclysmic Friday in the life of Jesus Christ.

The day has finally arrived for the most solemn of Fridays to appear. And verse one tells us that the Sanhedrin held one final consultation before they delivered Christ over to the Romans. As we look at this, the scene now seems far more subdued.

Far more subdued than earlier, when the guards and the surrounding crowds were doing everything they could to restrain themselves from tearing Christ limb from limb. But now, from an objective standpoint, this is the last opportunity.

Imagine if you were a member of the Sanhedrin for a second. This is the Sanhedrin's last opportunity to act in a circumspect and a righteous way. A crossroads has been set before them. The most important decision of their life awaits them right here, right now.

They can release Christ, or they can go ahead with their diabolical plan to deliver the only eternal Son of God over to a Roman cross. And verse one tells us exactly what they did. Their minds were made up.

They will stay the course. And in verse two, we're told that this wretched council of so-called righteous men bound Jesus and delivered him over to Pilate. Now, the mention of Pilate gives us the opportunity to better appreciate the historical and the geopolitical dynamics that were at play.

And to understand the identity of those who were sent, or who sent Jesus Christ to the cross on that Good Friday. And you know me. I'm a lover of good history. And I think that it helps us to understand the players of this story and understand what it is that this passage is trying to tell us.

Now, many of us, when we picture Christ being taken to the praetorium, picture Christ being taken to Pilate's mansion or palace somewhere in Jerusalem. But what we can tell is, from our archaeological excavations and from further study, is that that's probably not the case.

But in fact, that Pilate would be visiting Jerusalem from his home in Caesarea Maritima and would be staying in Herod's palace. And if we remember back a number of weeks now,.

Ago,.

You'll remember that we talked about the prowess, the engineering prowess of Herod the Great, Herod Antipas' father. And so just before Christ was born, Herod Antipas had made this massive palace on the west wall of Jerusalem.

It had a massive footprint. The footprint itself was over a thousand feet long. It was like a small city with its own theaters, its own canal system, even its own praetorium. And the praetorium on this palace ground or in this palace compound was often where the Roman governor would stay.

And so it was here that the Sanhedrin escorted Christ. And as I pointed out over and over again, maybe you're getting sick of hearing it, but I'm trying to make an important point here. Brothers and sisters, we can go to Israel today and we can see that palace with our own eyes.

And we can walk through some of the excavated halls of that palace. This is a historical fact that Christ went to this place. The historical Jesus went to this palace to be sentenced to death. And it was here that Christ was escorted to the Roman governor Pontius Pilate.

Now again, many atheists and many skeptics, how many people have you come into contact with who say, well, everything in the Bible is made up. The Bible is a lie. It's full of falsehoods. It's full of errors.

Well, there were many people for decades who said that there is no way that Jesus Christ went to the cross because the so-called man that he went to, Pontius Pilate, never actually existed. And they denied any claim or any, I guess, supposition, any suggestion is a better word, that Pontius Pilate ever existed.

And they demanded,.

How could Christ have been crucified if he didn't exist? And they were rather smug in their demands. That wasn't until 1961. In 1961, as there were excavations happening in Caesarea Maritima, they discovered a Latin inscription that spoke of the Praefectus Pontius Pilate.

And as I mentioned just a moment ago, it turns out that's where Pontius Pilate's home was, in Caesarea Maritima. And in the years that followed, we came to learn a great deal more about this man, Pontius Pilate.

It turns out, in fact, that Pontius Pilate was the fifth Roman governor over Palestine, and in fact had the longest tenure of any of those Roman governors. He served from AD 26 to AD 37 as the Roman governor in charge of Judea.

And I could certainly say a great deal about Pontius Pilate. He's a fascinating character, but I want to limit my comments to just a few observations. Pilate's reign, if you're writing notes, another alliteration.

I guess I was just full of alliterations this week. Pilate's reign could best be described by two words, both starting with the letter C. Cruel and compromised. Cruel and compromised. The Hellenistic Jewish philosopher Philo, a Greek-speaking Jew, he said that Pilate was an inflexible, stubborn, and cruel man.

But he also had a long history of buckling under the pressure and compromising when it best served his own interests. So for instance, if we were to go just a few years before this encounter in Mark chapter 15, it was seven years actually before Christ stood before Pontius Pilate, Pilate got himself into hot water when he decided that he wanted to violate some of the norms of the Jewish people in Jerusalem.

The Jews, as you might know, had a strict ban against any kind of image or statue in their presence. But Pontius Pilate, wanting to ingratiate himself with Rome, took the liberty of taking a bunch of the statues of the emperor and placing them throughout Jerusalem, thinking surely this would win him points with his boss.

But instead what happened was the Jews were so distraught, so upset about him violating their laws about images, that they marched, I think it was 120 kilometers from Jerusalem to Caesarea Maritima was to stage a non-violent protest.

And if you remember from the images on the news from a year and a half ago, when the trucker convoy went into Ottawa and set up camp in front of the parliament building, it was much like that. Only all the Jews, a mass of Jews, went to Caesarea Philippi and set up camps in front of Pontius Pilate's home.

And there in a non-violent way they made a ruckus for five days. And after five days, Pontius Pilate was so fed up with the whole scene that he ordered his soldiers to go and to just slay all of the Jews.

But the Jews, because they cared more about their law than about death, exposed their throats, they lifted their chins and they welcomed Pontius Pilate and his soldiers.

And said,.

You can kill us before we will put away with this idea of you having statues in Jerusalem. And Pontius Pilate buckled under the pressure.

He compromised.

He had no moral standards. He had no objective moral standard to hold himself to. And so when the going got tough, he folded under the pressure. Just a few years after that, Pontius Pilate robbed the temple treasury.

You'll remember the treasury that was in the temple where the widow put her mite. He robbed the temple treasury to pay for an almost 40 kilometer aqueduct through Israel into the city of Jerusalem. And the Jews were livid about the whole thought that he would use God's money to fund a public project.

But this time, Pontius Pilate had learned his lesson. He knew how stubborn the Jews were. And so in an extreme act of cowardice, he had his soldiers dress as Jews and mingle about the people. And as the people discovered what he had done and started to raise alarm about the issue, these disguised mercenaries took out clubs and beat the Jews to death.

Now many of those who didn't die from clubbing were died from being trampled over as men and women, unarmed men and women, ran for their lives. Pontius Pilate was a cruel, cowardly man. And eventually, due to his antics, he was stripped of his post as governor and exiled to Vienna, France.

So this was the man that Christ was handed over to. And as Christ stood before Pilate, he was asked, are you the king of the Jews? This was the charge against Christ. Sedition, treason. In verse two, Christ offers a cryptic response.

I'm sure some of us wish that Christ would have just said, yes, I am. I am Jesus Christ, God incarnate. We would have a perfect text to run to when the Jehovah's Witnesses came to our house the next day.

If he had just answered, yes, I am. I am this, I am this, I am this, and I am this. But instead, Christ gives us this cryptic response. It's not an affirmation. It's not a denial. But instead, it's an invitation.

Christ's life and ministry speaks for itself. And each individual must answer that question for himself. If you're prepared to see it, you know the right answer. And so with that, Christ remains silent.

And other books tell us all the charges that were brought against Christ, charges of blasphemy and of treason and all kinds of trumped up charges were read. And to Pilate's great amazement, Christ accepted his fate and remained perfectly silent.

Now it begs the question, Christian, brother or sister, what are we to do with this scene? Why did the Holy Spirit see fit to include these verses in Christ's passion narrative? Why not take us just directly from the upper room in Caiaphas' home to the cross?

I think it is because in this scene, we are afforded the opportunity to see and to rejoice in and to worship Christ, Jesus Christ, for his unflinching faithfulness, for his unparalleled righteousness.

I think it's here that we get to see the righteous Christ standing for what is good, standing for what is true in the face of difficulty. And I think we see that. And that's one of the themes that we're to come out with because here we see a picture of two royals as one final reminder of Christ's impeccable innocence.

We have the governor, Pilate, in his praetorium, a picture of cruelty and compromise. As one commentator puts it, like Herod Antipas when his hand was forced to behead John, Pilate stands as an impotent potentate, a slave to sin and a slave to the praise or the acceptance of fallen man.

And in front of that royal figure, in front of that governor, we have Christ the King, Christ the true King of the Jews in his humiliation, a picture of strong and silent resolve, of absolute obedience, the suffering servant of God who came not to give in to the dictates of fallen man, but to save fallen man.

And so in perfect lockstep with Isaiah 53, Christ remains silent. We read that passage last week. I'm not going to revisit it again. But in the context of Isaiah 53, 7, where Christ, like a lamb who is led to the slaughter, does not open his mouth, we find a complete picture of penal substitutionary atonement.

Now, what is penal substitutionary atonement? That Christ went to the cross to pay our penalty on our behalf as our substitute, as a vicarious sacrifice. And we see that in the context of this Christ remaining silent in Isaiah 53.

In Isaiah 53, 11, I could quote the whole chapter. I think many of us have read Isaiah 53 and just been blown away by the accuracy of every prophecy as it works its way through. But Isaiah 53, 11 says, out of the anguish of his soul, he shall see and be satisfied.

By his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant. Hear this. This is double imputation. My servant, make many to be accounted righteous and he shall bear their iniquities. Christ went to the cross to bear the sins of men and in so doing make sinful men righteous.

You can almost hear the words of Peter echoing that passage in 1 Peter 3, 18 where he says, for Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous that he might bring us to God. And what a righteousness it is, brothers and sisters.

If only we could appreciate the active obedience of Christ. None of us have ever known righteousness like that. I'm sure there are many of us who we've had an encounter with a man or a woman and we were just so impressed with their godliness that it left a lasting impression.

I can think of a number of brothers that I have met. I think of brothers because I'm a man, so no offense ladies. But I can think of a number of brothers who I have met and I see the way that they read their Bibles and I see the way that they love their wives or are pure and faithful in their singleness, who seek the Lord in prayer, who are a man of character.

It just pours out even in their speech and in their manner of speech that these are godly men. And I think when I've encountered a man like that, I think I want to be a more godly man still. There is a higher level than what I have experienced, than to what I have attained.

And brothers and sisters, that doesn't hold a match to the righteousness of Christ. If we were to be just for a moment in the presence of Christ and to experience what it looked like to fulfill all righteousness, even as Christ stood on the steps of that praetorium, we see him in all of his resplendent uprightness and virtue.

It reminds me of a story in Martin Luther's household. I just realized actually, I have a couple of Martin Luther stories today. But in Martin Luther's household, children, think of this. Picture family worship in your home.

Nope, nope, nope.

Actually, that's the other account. Don't picture family worship yet. Martin Luther gave perhaps the shortest eulogy that has ever been spoken at a funeral. We know what funerals are like as people gather.

And sometimes there's the long drawn-out eulogies and you wish the people would just stop already. And Martin Luther ascended the steps to the platform. As it came time for him to pronounce the eulogy, he said this.

He said, what we preached. It was about a man named Nicholas Houseman who died in 1522. He said, what we preached, he lived. What we preached, Nicholas Houseman lived. Now, I don't know much about Nicholas Houseman.

I trust that he was a faithful and God-fearing man. And I trust that because he was a faithful and God-fearing man, he would probably agree with me that such words could never be spoken of or could never be spoken in reference to a man.

But only Jesus Christ. That what we preach every Sunday and what you read in your Bibles every day of the week, there's only one who has ever fulfilled that perfectly. And his name is Jesus. Jesus Christ.

Believer, hear this with me. Christ came to take our sin upon himself. But more than that, he came in order that that righteousness of Jesus Christ that we have never fully known, never fully experienced, would be imputed to us through faith in him.

And if you're a believer in Christ, you stand now, not before Pontius Pilate, but before the living God clothed in, as we were just singing, the radiant robes of Jesus Christ's righteousness. Now, there's far more to say, but we're gonna look at a vivid picture of that reality here in our next passage.

And so let's read verses six through 15. Mark 15 verse six. Now at the feast, he used to release for them one prisoner for whom they asked. And among the rebels in prison who had committed murder in the insurrection, there was a man called Barabbas.

And the crowd came up and began to ask Pilate to do as he usually did for them. And he answered them saying, do you want me to release for you the king of the Jews? For he perceived that it was out of envy that the chief priests had delivered him up.

And the chief priest stirred up the crowd to have him released for them Barabbas instead. And Pilate again asked them, then what shall I do with the man you call the king of the Jews? And they cried out again, crucify him.

And Pilate said to him, why, what evil has he done? But they shouted all the more, crucify him. So Pilate, wishing to satisfy the crowd, released for them Barabbas. And having scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.

The Pardon of Barabbas and the Great Exchange

So we've looked at the praetorium and Pilate and the contrast between Christ and Pilate. Now I want us to look next at what we're calling the pardon. Here we see just from this opening scene that the Pilate had nearly limitless authority as the governor of Judea.

Imagine having that power legally to save one person and to kill another, almost as if it were on a whim. And knowing that the Jews had delivered Christ, at least we can give Pilate credit for this. Knowing that the Jews had delivered Christ to him out of envy, that is because they were jealous of his success.

Pilate offers to release Christ as part of this custom that had been established at the Passover. And we can see that custom laid out fully right then and there, that each Passover, the Roman governor would allow one criminal.

This still happens today, as bad as it sounds. One criminal to go free, to have amnesty based on popular opinion, based on who the people wanted out first. And verse 14 makes clear that Christ had committed no evil worthy of death.

And Pilate knew that. And so here Pilate puts Christ forward as that person. But again, at this opportunity to release Christ, verse 11 tells us, the chief priests stirred up the crowd. That word to stir up the crowd could also be translated.

They began to start a riot. So the people cried out for Barabbas to be released. And the way that Mark speaks about Barabbas in verse seven conveys something about this man. Who is this man Barabbas? We don't know much about him.

Some textual variants in Matthew tell us that his first name was Jesus. We don't know that for certain, but perhaps it was Jesus Barabbas. What we do know is that he was guilty of committing murder. According to God's law, he deserved the death sentence for murder.

But Mark tells us a little bit more than that. That he was not only guilty of murder, but he was guilty of murder. And see the words that Mark uses in verse seven. Guilty of murder in the insurrection.

He doesn't even have to tell his readers what insurrection it was. Apparently this insurrection was so significant that it could simply be called the insurrection. Kind of like if you're watching CNN.

I don't know how many people here watch CNN on the weekends. But if you're watching CNN and they reference January 6th, you don't need any more information. You know exactly what they are talking about.

Well, here Mark is talking about the insurrection. And it was Barabbas who was guilty of murder in this insurrection. So here the crowds have this opportunity before them. And what have we learned about crowds so far in the Gospel of Mark?

They almost always get it wrong. And so with the influence of the high priest, they call out for Barabbas to be released. This violent, treasonous murderer to be released instead of the righteous Christ.

And there's an important detail here that's essential for us to note if we're going to understand the imagery of this well. There is an image. There is an illustration here in Mark chapter 15 that we're meant to see.

And a lot of it has to do or can even be explained by looking at Barabbas in terms of his name. If you're familiar with Hebrew and Aramaic names, I'm not sure how many people are here that are familiar with Hebrew and Aramaic names, but the word Bar means what?

Does anyone know?

Bar.

Think Simon Bar-Jonah. Son. The word Bar means son. And think, brothers and sisters, when Christ was in the garden and he called out Abba, Father. We see here Bar-Abbas. It simply means the son of the father.

Now, why is that at all significant that a man named the son of the father would be released while Christ himself is condemned to death? Standing before the crowd are two sons. Perhaps if Matthew's variant is right, two Jesuses standing before the crowd.

One is Jesus Christ, the son of God. And the other is Barabbas, Jesus Barabbas, the son of his father, Adam. One of them must die and one of them must be set free. And at the encouragement of the chief priest, the crowds again cries out for the crucifixion of the son of God, to the full and absolute pardon of the son of Adam.

The innocent son of God is condemned as a penal substitute for the guilt of the son of Adam. I don't know if you see where I'm going here yet. The son of Adam who is released to enjoy a new life of freedom at Jesus Christ's expense.

One commentator says, just to lean on someone else so you know I'm not being novel here. It is not difficult to see in this prisoner exchange, a reflection of the substitutionary nature of Christ's atonement or substitutionary nature of Christ's atonement.

While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Here we see brothers and sisters, the son of Adam, exchanged for the son of God as a penal substitute. Brethren, why again did God the Holy Spirit include this account in scripture for all of us to see?

I think it is because he wanted to showcase the great exchange that took place when Christ went to the cross that Friday morning outside of Jerusalem. From Barabbas's standpoint, think about it if you're Barabbas.

From Barabbas's standpoint, it probably seemed too good to be true that you should be found guilty of convicted, a convicted criminal, guilty of insurrection and murder, set free because another man was condemned in your place.

But it was true. Absolutely true. Even though he was a murderous traitor, a sinner worthy of the swiftest and the most just of executions, Christ was condemned in his place and Barabbas was pardoned. Now did Barabbas deserve it?

Absolutely not. But that did not make it any less true. As he felt the shackles, again put yourself in Barabbas's position, as he felt the shackles fall from his wrists and as he walked out into Jerusalem under the blue sky, breathing the fresh air of the morning as a free man, just because it seemed too good to be true didn't mean that it wasn't true.

And see this with me, brothers and sisters. This is but a shadow of what Christ was about to accomplish as he went to Calvary's tree. Christian brothers and sisters, all of you, praise God, even me included, like Barabbas, we have been set free from our sin and death, but not to die again like Barabbas did, but to live forever.

As John 11, 26 says, everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Christ says, do you believe this? And I frame that question to you. Do you believe this? Brothers and sisters, do we deserve it?

Heck no.

Absolutely not. Under no circumstance and not in 10 billion years could we ever earn forgiveness. Like Barabbas, we deserve to die, but for reasons beyond our comprehension, beyond anything that we can think or fathom, God sent his son, Jesus, the son of God, to be our substitute on that Friday morning.

Like Barabbas, we get to go free, not because we deserve it, but because we have believed only in the name of Jesus Christ. And so for every Christian, oh, if we could just understand this part of the way, 90 would be too much.

Even if we could just understand it 50%, what Romans 8, 1 says, that there is therefore now no condemnation for those of you who are in Jesus Christ. Just as Barabbas went free, so you have gone free.

2 Corinthians 5, 21, for our sake he made him, Jesus Christ, to be sin who knew no sin so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. Brethren, we need a penal substitute. I'm sorry, we don't need a moral example.

We don't need a ransom theory Jesus. We don't even need a Christus victor Jesus. I'm not denying that Christ was victorious on that cross, but brothers and sisters, we needed a penal substitute and in Christ we got it.