All the verses you mentioned still do not mention that Jesus paid the "penalty" for sin, or that sins were transferred. The way Jesus took upon sins was through the incarnation, by taking a mortal body inherited from Mary, He could be tempted in all sins. He conquered those temptations, and thus conquered hell. That is how He redeemed humanity. Sins cannot be removed unless it is done through repentance, and in repentance Jesus works within us to remove them.
Doug, I resist the view that incarnation = atonement, because it lessens the cross. Also, I'm not convinced that PSA = payment. The language of sin as debt and the idea of a payment is found in the OT and NT, but not so much in relation to Jesus's death. But that God "condemned" sin in the flesh is clearly penal/punitive and Jesus become a "acursed" for us, in our stead, is also punitive and substitutionary.
You can explain the reason why God had to become incarnate in human form by the fact by doing so, He could fight directly against temptations originating from hell, which were the sins and transgressions of the whole world as Jesus fought against all of hell in this manner until He conquered it. The cross was simply His last temptation before His body was made completely Divine. That by fighting temptations, and glorifying Himself He saved humanity, He declares in John 17:19, afterwards He works the same in repentance in us. PSA runs into several logical issues as well as it goes counter to passages like Ex. 23:7 and Ezek. 18 in the OT, and I am telling Jews that they do not have to reject Christianity because of this. PSA lessens the need for repentance, and encourages people to believe they can convert once and then do nothing else. There is a whole branch of Christianity, the Orthodox church, which does not follow this kind of theory. The Christus Victor view is more logical than PSA and can explain all the verses you quote.
And God regenerates those that He dies for, which is why those who love the truth of PSA haved repented and believed. You make faith out to be something untethered to the circumcision of the heart that God performs. This is a strawman.
Greetings. Exodus 23:7 is dealing with corrective justice from one person to the next. It is not a text about the cosmic plane between us and God. When administrating justice on the plane of creation and creatures, we are not to punish one for another creatures' sins.
But in the cosmic plane, PSA is throughly prefigured in the OT and explicit of the Mwssiah in Isaiah 53. See the following. The Orthodox Church is mistaken.
The Hebrew word אָשָׁם (ʾāšām) is frequently used in the Old Testament to refer to the "guilt offering" (also translated as “trespass offering” in some older versions like KJV). It appears most prominently in the Levitical sacrificial system. Here are key texts where ʾāšām clearly refers to a guilt offering:
1. Leviticus 5:14–19
This passage introduces the guilt offering for unintentional sins involving the holy things of the Lord.
Leviticus 5:15 – "If anyone commits a breach of faith and sins unintentionally in any of the holy things of the Lord, he shall bring to the Lord as his compensation (ʾāšām) a ram without blemish..."
Leviticus 5:19 – "It is a guilt offering (ʾāšām); he has indeed incurred guilt before the Lord."
2. Leviticus 6:1–7 (Hebrew 5:20–26)
Details the guilt offering in cases of deceit, theft, or false oath.
Leviticus 6:6 – "And he shall bring to the priest as his guilt offering (ʾāšām) to the Lord a ram without blemish..."
3. Leviticus 7:1–7
Gives further instructions on the guilt offering.
Leviticus 7:1 – "This is the law of the guilt offering (ʾāšām). It is most holy."
Leviticus 7:7 – "The guilt offering is just like the sin offering..."
4. Leviticus 14:12–18
Guilt offering is used in the ritual for cleansing a leper.
Leviticus 14:12 – "Then the priest shall take one of the male lambs and offer it as a guilt offering (ʾāšām)..."
5. Leviticus 19:20–22
A guilt offering is required when a man lies with a slave woman designated for another man.
Leviticus 19:21 – "He shall bring his guilt offering (ʾāšām) to the Lord..."
6. Numbers 5:5–10
Although the word ʾāšām isn't used here explicitly, the concept of compensation and reparation offering aligns closely with guilt offerings, especially in light of Leviticus.
7. Isaiah 53:10
This is a messianic use of ʾāšām, applying the concept to the suffering servant.
Isaiah 53:10 – "When his soul makes an offering for guilt (ʾāšām), he shall see his offspring..."
I think another concern regarding the emphasis on PSA is the western obsession with law and legal language. Instead of seeing God as loving us so as to heal, restore, etc... and have relationship with Him and others, it instead becomes all about the line of legal standing.
The trinitarian requirement makes Jesus complicit in his own offering (John 10.18) in the same way that Abraham and Isaac went up the hill 'together' (Gen 22). Without the willingness of the Son, some would be somewhat right to condemn the child abuse.
agreed, the correct atonement theory is all of them at once since they are all in scripture and don't contradict each other. PSA isn't the only atonement theory that has problems if you don't understand the trinity btw. I think moral influence theory also deflates without a trinity. A God who sits there on a priveledged throne wondering why we can't get our act together and sends their child to be tortured and die so we can admire his good example and do the same is a very different God to one that takes off their privelege, does good at great personal cost even to death and even has to learn what it is like to have to depend on God and trust Him.
Great review! I was thinking Tom Wright was a little slippery there, seeing sin punished (not necessarily Jesus), and aiming for a broadly non-PSA picture of atonement. I do wish we (in our American ev churches) had more Christus Victor in the mix. Kristin Du Mez just today shared a reflection from a colleague on the Resurrection and victory over death. It's just... more satisfying. Anyway great write-up. The line about Anselm is eye-opening. I'm not familiar enough with him.
Hi Mike
I believe Jesus has to be God to be an adequate payment for sins against God? Am I mistaken? Is there a verse that supports that view?
Thanks
I agree with you, I think it's the logic of atonement: God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself.
All the verses you mentioned still do not mention that Jesus paid the "penalty" for sin, or that sins were transferred. The way Jesus took upon sins was through the incarnation, by taking a mortal body inherited from Mary, He could be tempted in all sins. He conquered those temptations, and thus conquered hell. That is how He redeemed humanity. Sins cannot be removed unless it is done through repentance, and in repentance Jesus works within us to remove them.
Doug, I resist the view that incarnation = atonement, because it lessens the cross. Also, I'm not convinced that PSA = payment. The language of sin as debt and the idea of a payment is found in the OT and NT, but not so much in relation to Jesus's death. But that God "condemned" sin in the flesh is clearly penal/punitive and Jesus become a "acursed" for us, in our stead, is also punitive and substitutionary.
You can explain the reason why God had to become incarnate in human form by the fact by doing so, He could fight directly against temptations originating from hell, which were the sins and transgressions of the whole world as Jesus fought against all of hell in this manner until He conquered it. The cross was simply His last temptation before His body was made completely Divine. That by fighting temptations, and glorifying Himself He saved humanity, He declares in John 17:19, afterwards He works the same in repentance in us. PSA runs into several logical issues as well as it goes counter to passages like Ex. 23:7 and Ezek. 18 in the OT, and I am telling Jews that they do not have to reject Christianity because of this. PSA lessens the need for repentance, and encourages people to believe they can convert once and then do nothing else. There is a whole branch of Christianity, the Orthodox church, which does not follow this kind of theory. The Christus Victor view is more logical than PSA and can explain all the verses you quote.
And God regenerates those that He dies for, which is why those who love the truth of PSA haved repented and believed. You make faith out to be something untethered to the circumcision of the heart that God performs. This is a strawman.
Greetings. Exodus 23:7 is dealing with corrective justice from one person to the next. It is not a text about the cosmic plane between us and God. When administrating justice on the plane of creation and creatures, we are not to punish one for another creatures' sins.
But in the cosmic plane, PSA is throughly prefigured in the OT and explicit of the Mwssiah in Isaiah 53. See the following. The Orthodox Church is mistaken.
The Hebrew word אָשָׁם (ʾāšām) is frequently used in the Old Testament to refer to the "guilt offering" (also translated as “trespass offering” in some older versions like KJV). It appears most prominently in the Levitical sacrificial system. Here are key texts where ʾāšām clearly refers to a guilt offering:
1. Leviticus 5:14–19
This passage introduces the guilt offering for unintentional sins involving the holy things of the Lord.
Leviticus 5:15 – "If anyone commits a breach of faith and sins unintentionally in any of the holy things of the Lord, he shall bring to the Lord as his compensation (ʾāšām) a ram without blemish..."
Leviticus 5:19 – "It is a guilt offering (ʾāšām); he has indeed incurred guilt before the Lord."
2. Leviticus 6:1–7 (Hebrew 5:20–26)
Details the guilt offering in cases of deceit, theft, or false oath.
Leviticus 6:6 – "And he shall bring to the priest as his guilt offering (ʾāšām) to the Lord a ram without blemish..."
3. Leviticus 7:1–7
Gives further instructions on the guilt offering.
Leviticus 7:1 – "This is the law of the guilt offering (ʾāšām). It is most holy."
Leviticus 7:7 – "The guilt offering is just like the sin offering..."
4. Leviticus 14:12–18
Guilt offering is used in the ritual for cleansing a leper.
Leviticus 14:12 – "Then the priest shall take one of the male lambs and offer it as a guilt offering (ʾāšām)..."
5. Leviticus 19:20–22
A guilt offering is required when a man lies with a slave woman designated for another man.
Leviticus 19:21 – "He shall bring his guilt offering (ʾāšām) to the Lord..."
6. Numbers 5:5–10
Although the word ʾāšām isn't used here explicitly, the concept of compensation and reparation offering aligns closely with guilt offerings, especially in light of Leviticus.
7. Isaiah 53:10
This is a messianic use of ʾāšām, applying the concept to the suffering servant.
Isaiah 53:10 – "When his soul makes an offering for guilt (ʾāšām), he shall see his offspring..."
Excellent, Mike! Thanks for this. Have you read Crisp yet? He has some very keen insights. See my https://inchristus.com/2020/02/27/oliver-crisp-on-approaching-the-atonement/
This has to be the best thing I've ever read on PSA... thank you.
James, my pleasure!
That was very informative.
I think another concern regarding the emphasis on PSA is the western obsession with law and legal language. Instead of seeing God as loving us so as to heal, restore, etc... and have relationship with Him and others, it instead becomes all about the line of legal standing.
Thanks for this Mike! I'm curious whether you see PSA in the church fathers, or just SA?
The trinitarian requirement makes Jesus complicit in his own offering (John 10.18) in the same way that Abraham and Isaac went up the hill 'together' (Gen 22). Without the willingness of the Son, some would be somewhat right to condemn the child abuse.
agreed, the correct atonement theory is all of them at once since they are all in scripture and don't contradict each other. PSA isn't the only atonement theory that has problems if you don't understand the trinity btw. I think moral influence theory also deflates without a trinity. A God who sits there on a priveledged throne wondering why we can't get our act together and sends their child to be tortured and die so we can admire his good example and do the same is a very different God to one that takes off their privelege, does good at great personal cost even to death and even has to learn what it is like to have to depend on God and trust Him.
You should know how pastorally helpful this article is to me. I've come back to it several times now.
Thank You, Dr. Bird.
I've been preaching on atonement during Lent this year, and summed it up on Easter: https://phillipaross.substack.com/p/atonement-conforming
This was wonderful
Each of the verses you quoted can be used to defend PSA if you already believe in it but would be understood differently by someone who doesn’t.
The truth that Christ volunteered for the cross places PSA in the right light.
Great review! I was thinking Tom Wright was a little slippery there, seeing sin punished (not necessarily Jesus), and aiming for a broadly non-PSA picture of atonement. I do wish we (in our American ev churches) had more Christus Victor in the mix. Kristin Du Mez just today shared a reflection from a colleague on the Resurrection and victory over death. It's just... more satisfying. Anyway great write-up. The line about Anselm is eye-opening. I'm not familiar enough with him.
A very helpful analysis.