A Brief Defense of Penal Subtitutionary Atonement

If it is possible, remove this cup from me.

Now the cup needs to be understood because the cup itself is being used in a way that we normally don't use the language.

When I talk about a cup, in general, I'm talking about a cup out of which we drink.

And in that sense, Jesus is using the word in that way, but he's using it in a way to point to an

Old Testament principle. And the Old Testament principle was the cup of wrath, the cup of wrath.

In the Old Testament, throughout the Old Testament, you will read several passages where it refers to God storing up his wrath as it were, like in a cup.

And on the day of his judgment, taking that which is in that cup, his stored up wrath against sinners and pouring that wrath out upon them.

And so when Jesus says, take this cup from me, he is not referring to some kind of vessel that is literal, but rather he is referring to the figurative cup of God's wrath, which has been holding the wrath of sinners since the beginning.

And if you just have just a moment and you wanna open your

Bibles very quickly, turn with me to Isaiah 53, looking at beginning at verse five.

By the way, if you're unfamiliar, Isaiah was written about 700 years before Christ, and yet it points to Christ in several passages, chapter 714, chapter 9 -6, and specifically this passage points to Jesus.

And it says, surely he has borne our griefs, carried our sorrows, yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted.

That phrase, smitten by God, is very important because that is one of several in this passage that tells us what is happening on the cross.

Smitten by God and afflicted, he was wounded for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities, upon him the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his stripes we are healed.

Don't wanna get into that one right now, that's been absconded with by many a false faith healer trying to say that through Jesus' cross every sickness is a mere faith belief away from being healed.

That's not what it's referring to. It's referring to our sin being taken by Christ. It's not a promise of divine healing for every sickness.

But again, I said I wasn't gonna get into it, but I did. All we like sheep have gone astray, we have turned every one to his own way, and the

Lord has laid upon him the iniquity of us all. Laid on him the iniquity of us.

So he has been smitten by God, and laid upon him is our iniquity.

He was oppressed, he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth, like a lamb led to the slaughter, and like a sheep before its shearers is silence, so he opened not his mouth.

By oppression and judgment he was taken away, and as for his generation, who has considered that he was cut off from the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people.

Again, I wanna put that one under, stricken for transgression of the people.

Not his own, not his own transgression, that's key. We have to understand, for what reason did

Jesus die? Not for his sins, but for ours. And then it goes on to prophesy, they made his grave with the wicked and rich man in his death, although he had done no violence, there was no deceit in his mouth, yet it was the will, this is the part

I was trying to get to, yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him. Will of the

Lord to crush him, that is the key.

It was the will of the Lord to crush him. He has put him to grief. When his soul makes an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring, he shall prolong his days, the will of the

Lord shall prosper in his hand, now, for sake of time, we won't read the rest, but I'm trying to drive to a point.

And I was talking to Brother Andy, I think Chris, I think we were talking about this beforehand too. There is a very real push today by many people to try to deny the doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement.

Penal substitutionary atonement means that when Christ was on the cross, he was taking the penalty for our sin, that he was the substitute for us, and he was making an atonement between us and God, bringing reconciliation between the two.

And the way he did that was God poured out his wrath on Christ in our place. That's what we call penal substitutionary atonement.

And everybody in this church, we would all say a hearty amen because you've been preaching that for 20 years. I mean, that's what we preach, that's what we teach.

But there are many people that are starting with great vehemence to deny that doctrine.

And many Christians today are starting to, they say, oh, it's just Calvinistic doctrine.

This is not Calvinism. This is straight Bible. This should be affirmed by Calvinist, non -Calvinist.

Because this is what the Bible teaches, that on the cross, I put this, in fact, I put this on Twitter. I said, on that cross when

Jesus died, the wrath of God was satisfied. Now, the majority of people, oh, yeah, great, hearts and amens.

But I received very, several messages, private messages, emails, things, you should not believe in penal substitutionary atonement.

And I was like, from my cold, dead hand, man. It was like, you're gonna have to drag me away from it because this is what

I believe the Bible teaches. And I believe it teaches it right here. I believe this cup of wrath was pre -prophesied, rather, by Isaiah, that he would be smitten by God.

See, the thing that we have to realize is everything that happened on Christ, on the cross, happened by the hand of God.

April, or April, Acts 4, how long was that, April 4? Acts 4 clearly says that what

Herod and Pontius Pilate did, they did because God had determined that it would be done, that God had determined from the beginning the cross, that he is, in fact, was the plan.

Smitten by God, God laid upon him the iniquity of us all. He was stricken for the transgression of the people, not for his own, and the will of the

Lord was to crush him. Having thought about all of this from Isaiah 53 and knowing that Christ, in fact, is the word of God made flesh, that he certainly knows

Isaiah 53 better than any of us, he knows what he means when he talks about that cup.

And when he talks about that cup, he's talking about that. He's talking about what

God is fixing to do to him, what the Father is going to do to the

Son on the cross, not the Romans, not the Jews, not the enemies of God, but God himself is going to punish his

Son in the place of us. This is why

Paul would later say God did this so he could be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Christ.

Why those two phrases in Romans 3, 26, just and justifier? God can be just, righteous, because he does not punish sin.

He punishes it, therefore he's righteous. But he's the justifier of those who have faith in Christ because he punishes the sin in Christ.

In just a few weeks, I'm gonna be in 2 Corinthians 5 .21. I'm gonna spend a whole Sunday. You're gonna hear this again, by the way, because on whatever

Sunday I get to it, 2 Corinthians 5 .21 says what? Anybody remember it? God made him who knew no sin to become sin for us, that we could become the righteousness of God in him.