Why Jesus? Why the Cross?

By: Mónica Carvajal

“He who understand the cross aright… understands the Bible, he understands Jesus Christ.”^[1]

An Introduction

The cross of Christ is at the center of Christianity and therefore has been the center of constant attack, both inside and outside of the church. The understanding of the doctrine of Atonement is important because of its implications and consequences related to our understanding of doctrines such as Soteriology, Theology Proper, Christology, Harmatology, among others. Although some scholars do not deny the doctrine of Atonement itself, they deny the theory of the Penal Substitution of Christ, which I am convinced, is the one that the Bible teaches, and the one I want to address here.

This paper is an attempt to demonstrate that both the OT and NT teaches the Penal Substitutionary Atonement of Christ as the basis for our justification (Rom 3:24) and that denying this doctrine leads to a misunderstanding of His perfect sacrifice and its implications in the life of the believer, as well as to the preaching of an incomplete Gospel that only focuses on the love of God, or the moral impact of Christ’s death, and diminish the justice and holiness of God shown at Calvary. Although this is a basic and fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith, sometimes is misunderstood or overlooked. Leon Morris once wrote “We should not expect that our theories will ever explain it fully. Even when we put them all together, we will no more than begin to comprehend a little of the vastness of God’s saving deed.” [2]

The topic will be addressed as follow: 1) an overview to the different theories of the atonement. 2) The Penal Substitution of Christ as a shadow in the OT but revealed in the N.T. 3) how this doctrine impacts the life of the believer, and 4) how this topic applies to my own life.

1) Theories of the Atonement: An Overview

The atonement demonstrates the cross as the means by which sinful man can be reconciled to a holy and just God. What has been taught by the church regarding this doctrine?

1. a) The Ransom to Satan Theory: Was taught in the early church by Origen. It declares that the atonement was the ransom that Christ paid to Satan to deliver mankind from Satan’s kingdom. The theory is based is Mark 10:45 where Jesus says that He came “to give his life as a ransom for many.” Jesus never said that the ransom would be paid to Satan. Moreover to pay a ransom to Satan “was to accord him a dignity he did not deserve and even to abdicate divine sovereignty.”[3] The theory is right in which it realized the importance of a ransom paid for our sin, but it fails in its interpretation of to whom this ransom was paid…God.
2. b) The Example Theory: In the 16th century Socinus taught a theory that denies that God’s justice requires payment for sin; the atonement was seen as an example given by Christ to live a life of obedience, rather than a substitutionary blood sacrifice. It was based in 1 Peter 2:21 as Christ being an example to follow. Although it is true that Christ is our example of obedience, submission to the will of God, humility, love and sacrifice to the point of death, etc. His life and death accomplished more than a simple example for us.
3. c) The Governmental Theory: Hugo Grotius being a lawyer said that God should be seen as a moral governor; that Christ death upon the cross was a demonstration of God’s hatred against sin, and that “Christ did not exactly pay the penalty for the actual sins of any people, but simply suffered to show that when God’s laws are broken, there must be some penalty paid.”^[4] This theory focuses more in the manifestation of the justice of God rather than in its satisfaction through the sacrifice of Christ. The approach falls short in understand the character of God.
4. d) The Moral Influence Theory: Peter Abelard proposed that the atonement was the demonstration of God’s love to humankind. The love of God produces an effect in the heart of the people that receive the forgiveness of God by seeing God’s love. This theory denies that man has been reconciled to God through the blood of Christ and denies that God requires a payment for sin. Opponents of the penal substitution such as Colin Greene agrees with this theory when says that “penal substitution has remained one of the distinguish markers of the evangelical tradition, even though it is often asserted that such a punitive notion of substitution is both morally repugnant [5]and incomprehensible to our contemporaries.”[6] This is relevant because those who oppose to the penal substitution atonement are preaching an idea that agrees with the moral influence theory, and therefore presents an incomplete Gospel that lacks the justice and holiness of God, leaving people still lost in their sins and transgression.
5. e) The View of the Catholic Church: In the mass the body and blood of Christ are present in a real way through the transubstantiation of the wine and bread, so the last supper becomes a real sacrifice in the Eucharist.[7] The sacrifice of the cross is perpetuated in the sacrifice of the mass without blood, accomplishing atonement and propitiation.[8] This church denies that the sacrifice of the cross is finished (John19:30), that without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness (Heb 9:22) and that there is no longer any offering for sin (Heb 10:17-19).
6. f) Penal Substitution: “God gave himself in the person of his Son to suffer instead of us the death, punishment and curse due to fallen humanity as the penalty for sin.”^[9] On the cross, Jesus took the wrath of God upon Himself, as a propitiation for our sin, He paid the penalty and He was the substitute dying in our place. This doctrine consists of sacrifice, propitiation, substitution and reconciliation, and therefore is related to the sacrificial system of the OT and is clearly taught in the NT in John 1:29, 2 Cor 5:21, Gal 3:13, Heb 9:28. The imputation of our sins to Christ and of Christ’ righteousness to us is an important concept of this theory. The doctrine of penal substitution “is disappearing from the modern church with some scholars arguing “that it is irrelevant, too violent, too individualistic, or insufficient.”[10]

2) Penal Substitution of Christ: A Shadow in the OT… Revealed in the NT

The need for the atonement is found in the book of Genesis and goes on through the entire Bible. God created us to have a relationship with Him, but with the fall described in Genesis 3 this relationship was broken and the consequences of sin became a reality. Thus, we were separated from God resulting in our spiritual death (Eph 2:1); we are born in sin (Ps 51:5); we became Satan’s children (John 8:44) and we all are under the wrath of God and we deserve His punishment (Eph 2:3). Physical death became a reality (Rom. 5:12, 6:23). And the place where we should pay the price for our rebellion is hell (Matt 25:41, 46; 2 Thess. 1:9).

As the wages of sin is death (Rom 6:23), wherever there is sin there must be death. However, God did not kill Adam and Eve at the moment of the fall, by the contrary the first suggestion of a death as the consequence of sin is found in Gen 3:21 where God himself covers their sin, showing that He wanted to have communion with them. Swann, J. T. says that ‘the skin garments Yahweh clothed Adam and Eve with may be indications of an animal sacrifice, suggesting a divine prototypical origin of the sacrificial system.”^[11] Here God was demonstrating that the only cover for sin would be done by his own means and according to His standards, not through the ideas or means of men as in (Gen 3:7).

Through the Scriptures we see that God always provides the means by which men can reestablishes the fellowship with Him. Why? The answer lies in His character. God is holy (Lev 11:44), He hates sin (Ps 5:4), and He will by no means leave the guilty unpunished (Nah.1:3).  For that reason, He gave the people of Israel the sacrificial system as a reminder that the penalty for sin is death, and as a means to have communion with Him while also was showing them that His justice could be satisfied only by His standards.

God reveals His way to deals with sin through the figure of atonement that means ‘to cover’ or simply ‘at-one-ment’, or “reconciliation… it means satisfaction… to make atonement for one is to make satisfaction for his offences.”^[12] This word appears in the OT in (Ex. 32:30; Lev. 4:26; 5:16; 6:6-7; Num. 6:11), while in the NT is translated as reconciliation in Romans 5:11. “The word atonement or the Hebrew word “kipper can relate to forgiveness, cleansing, ransom (Mark 10:45), and the averting of God’s wrath.”^[13] There are many aspects of the atonement such as: a) its cause or necessity[14], b) Its extension,[15] c) Its nature[16] and d) the perfection of the atonement.[17]

The atonement was made in the context of a sacrifice or as “an act that involved offering to God the life of an animal. It expressed gratitude for God’s goodness or acknowledgment of sin. It was also associated with establishing a covenant.”^[18] Offering is “a thing brought near.”[19]

In Exodus 12:13 “The Passover Lamb functioned as a penal substitute, dying in the place of the firstborn sons of the Israelites, in order that they might escape the wrath of God.”^[20] God saved the people of Israel not only from the oppression of pharaoh, but he was also delivering them from His own wrath and in the same way through Christ, our Passover [21], God is delivering us from the slavery of sin and of His judgment. In 1 Corinthians 5:7 the apostle Paul links the death of Christ with the Passover when he was rebuking immorality within the church, and he exhorted them to live a life without the old leaven by removing the evil person from the church, and the sin from their lives.

With the old covenant there was a need to make sacrifices and give offerings to God in order to have his favor and continue on His grace. Jeremiah 31:31-34 predicted that there would be a time when God would make a new covenant with the nation of Israel. In Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24 Jesus Himself is explaining the meaning of His blood as being poured out for the forgiveness of our sins and as the beginning of the new covenant. In this context the term “sacrifice (expiation) is that priestly work of Christ wherein He removed our sin and its guilt by offering up Himself to God in our place.”^[22] Christ and the Father cooperated for our deliverance of sin as 2 Corinthians 5:19 establish.

Explaining Leviticus 16, other important passage related to the penal substitution of Christ, William Barrick says “the scapegoat symbolized the removal of Israel’s sin to allow people to enter the presence of a holy God. The Day of Atonement expiated the nation’s sins, cleansed the sanctuary from sin’s pollution, and removed sins from the community.”^[23] Christ is the Lamb of God who expiates our sin, cleanses our hearts and built the bridge establishing communion between God and us. Bruce Demarest says that “OT people who practiced the prescribed sacrifices and offerings in repentance and faith toward God were saved by the yet future work of Christ prefigured by those rites (Rom 3:25).”^[24] So, in the O.T period salvation was a merciful and gracious gift of God that was given to those who obeyed in faith. In this new age there is no more need for sacrifice because Christ has done the perfect one (Heb 9:11, 26), and those who come to Him in faith receive as well the gift of salvation.

In this regard, The Day of Atonement was the only time of the year in which the high priest was allowed to enter into the Holy of Holies to make expiation for his own sins and those of the people. Christ is our High Priest who entered into the Most Holy Place of Heaven (Heb 9:11), “once and for all” and He offered His own blood, which is always needed as Leviticus 17:11 says. Spurgeon once wrote “in every place, at every time, in every instance where sin had to be removed, blood must flow, life must be given!”^[25] Christ took away our sin (John 1:29). He achieved eternal redemption for us by paying the price to set us free of the bondage to sin and to Satan (Mark 10:45), Christ was our substitute, which means that He “acted in place of and on behalf of His people.”

Christ is our Mediator in His role as the High Priest and He offered Himself as a voluntary sacrifice.[26] The term Mediator is used in two ways in the N.T “one who mediates between two parties…to producing peace and one who acts as a guarantee so as to secure something which otherwise would not be obtained.”[27] Christ is the only Mediator between God and us (1 Tim 2:5). On the one hand to be our Mediator Christ should participate in our nature but without sin[28], He should be a man. On the other hand he should have the nature and attributes of God. The Bible declares that Christ met these two requirements: as a man “He knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21), and as God He imputed His righteousness to us (Titus 2:13, 2 Pet 1:1).

In this context the word katallasso or reconciliation which means “to change, from enmity to friendship, to reconcile,”[29] is significant in Christ’ death, because “by reason of this, men in their sinful condition and alienation from God are invited to be “reconciled” to Him… and accept the provision God has made, whereby their sins can be remitted and they themselves be justified in His sight in Christ.”[30] In this way, the love (Rom 5:8, 1Jn 4:10, Jn 3:16) and the justice of God (Rom 3:25) are demonstrated in the death of Christ as the propitiation for our sins. God is just, holy and loving, so in the cross He showed us mercy because of His love for us, but He also manifested His justice by punishing His Son in our place (1Jn 2:2, Rev 1:5). Here we have the reason for why those theories that denied the justice or the love of God should be seen as incompletely biblical, and why the penal substitution is known by its name.

In Isaiah 52;13-53:12 we see Christ as the innocent and sinless suffering servant (53:4), and as a voluntary, obedient, humble and silent sufferer (53:7). In His suffering he bore the sin of many (53:12), He fulfilled the will of God giving Himself as a guilt offering (53:10), He dealt with our sin, transgressions, iniquities (53:5,11,12), He shown that He suffering was vicarious which means that was instead of ours or substitutionary (53:4-6,8-12)  and redemptive (53:5), He gave His life dying for us (53:8,10,12), but unlike the bulls He rose again (53:10) and by His knowledge we are justified before God (Is 53:11, Rom 3:24-25).

The mercy of God and His justice (Ps 85:10) are present in the word hilaskomai or propitiation which means ““to be propitious or merciful to” a person as seen in Luke 18:13, and in Hebrews 2:17 means “to expiate or to make propitiation for” the object, in this case sin.”[31]

Only by the blood of Christ the wrath of God against His enemies could be satisfied, so when we confess Christ as our Savior we are no longer under the condemnation of God, because we have been reconciled to Him and we do not need to be afraid the day we will before the Throne of God in our final day (Rom 5:10; 2 Cor 5:18-19,21; Gal 3:13-14). John Murray once wrote “the doctrine of the propitiation is precisely this that God loved the objects of His wrath so much that He gave His own Son to the end that He by His blood should make provision for the removal of this wrath.”[32]

In this sense the theories of the atonement that deny the justice of God, the love of God, or the reconciliation to God which has been possible only by the propitiation of the death of Christ, are incomplete and therefore should be taken into consideration carefully, otherwise we could be guilty of being changing the message of the Gospel…the message of the cross.

In conclusion we should always remember that “the death of Jesus Christ put an end to the need for constant expiation, not because the sinners he redeemed ceased to sin but because his sacrifice was sufficient for all eternity” [33] and that the Trinitarian implications of the “penal substitution in Christ’s atonement are: (1) The Father’s Divine satisfaction that results from …the Son’s Divine substitution as sin-bearer and sacrifice that results in … the Spirit’s Divine sanctification of repentant human sinners.”[34]

3) How this Doctrine Impacts the Life of the Believer? A Study Case

Paul is a 50 year old man who grew up as a Catholic, and whom recently confessed Christ as his Savior. He seems to be misunderstanding the concept of sin, forgiveness, grace and justification. Although he only talks about the love of God for him, but he never says anything about gratitude for the provision and salvation he has received in Christ. Paul is shows an unforgiving spirit toward others, He feels guilty continually, and he always wants things his way.

Recently Paul was diagnosed with cancer. He feels guilty because of all the wrong decisions and things he has done in the past, and sometimes he thinks God is punishing him, and that he needs to do good works to assurance an entrance into heaven. The Catholic Roman idea of good works and the need of following the law are present in Paul’s conversation. He seems to be focusing more on his own feelings and ideas rather than in God’s promises and the perfect sacrifice of Christ as the basis for his salvation and justification.

There are different aspects to consider: What is Paul’s believe system regarding the cross of Christ? Has Paul really understood the meaning and implications of the atonement of Christ on his behalf? What Paul thinks about sin? How he sees it? How he thinks God sees it? How the example of Christ’s life and death should impact Paul’s life? What does God say about who Paul is in Christ? What are the promises of God for those who believe in Jesus? How the forgiveness of sin that Paul has received in Christ should impact the way he treats and forgives others? What does God want Paul to do?

All this questions will find its answer when Paul will confront with the doctrine of the atonement. Only when he understands the implications of Christ’s sacrifice on his behalf he will be able to see the hatred God has for sin, the price that Christ paid for his soul, the love and the justice of God that were meet at Calvary, the assurance of his salvation not because of his good works but because of the perfect sacrifice of Christ that had made atonement for his sin.

Since Paul is facing a near death, the knowledge of God’s character and attributes will play a very important part. It is not a time to be focused in what Paul lacks for, in this case health; it is a time to be focused in the giver of life, God, and of trusting in His goodness and love, in His promises of eternal life and the resurrection of the body, the joy of an eternity in His presence and the joy of being a participant of His glory…all because of Christ’s atonement, and Paul’s faith in it.

So then, Paul will comprehend the justice, love, holiness, mercy and grace of God. He will be able to see his sin as God sees it, and he will have a grateful heart due to the indescribable gifts God has given him, such as: forgiveness of sin (Matt 26:28), deliverance from sin (Rom 6:23), new life in Christ (2 Cor 5:17), a new heart (Ez 36:25-27), the ability to be death to sin but alive to God (Rom 6:11-12), the promise of a new body and a future resurrection (1 Cor 15:53-55), the presence of the Holy Spirit (John 14:15-21)

Once Paul has understood all the implications and blessings he has received in Christ he can grow in a desire to live a life of holiness, he will gain a better understanding of the way in which his sin impacts his relationship with God, not to be afraid of be separated of Him, but to ask for forgiveness and the help of God to overcome his sin, and have communion with his Father.

Paul will be abandon his system of good works while he replaces it with the system of faith in Christ, and he will understand the nature of his faith as an important part in the forgiveness of God to him, that would impact his forgiveness toward other (Col 3:13). It will change his relationship with God and others (Eph 4:32). Paul will forgive easily others because he will admit that his sin against God is greater than any other offense that may have been committed against him.

The guilt of Paul will disappear when he understands that there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Rom 8:1-2), he will rest knowing that the blood of Christ has paid the penalty for his past, present and future sins, and that God will never remember these sins again (Ps103:12). He will have peace with God and he will rest in the perfect and lasting sacrifice of Christ. He will go before the throne of God with confidence in prayer.

Paul will be transformed into the very image of Christ, and will be able to follow His example in newness of life knowing that he has been bought with a price of blood and that the Holy Spirit who dwells in him will help him all the way through until the day in which he will be face to face with the Father.

The cross of Christ will be relevant for Paul as a model for self-sacrificial suffering. He will determine also that the real sacrifice God wants of him is worship and a life of obedience that flows of love and not from fear.

When Paul understand the clearly teaching of the Bible about the penal substitution of Christ he will experience the true freedom that comes by knowing that he has been forgiven and declared justified before God.

4) What About Me? How this Topic Applies to My Own Life:

Understanding the penal substitution of Christ makes me realize that the denial of this doctrine affects the meaning of the Gospel and the centrality of the cross, as well as its “implications for nearly every major doctrine historically identified with evangelicalism.”[35]

I have reinforced my conviction about the importance of the sacrifice of Christ, because without His life, death and resurrection the whole Christianity loses its value and power, and therefore I still be will lose and unsaved. I have also gain a deeper assurance about the real meaning of justification.

I am convinced that this doctrine should be in the center of my life and should be the one to which I hold on when difficult times come my way. If Christ has suffer for me the way He did it, I am persuaded to suffer with him as well, and to live my life as a living sacrifice (Rom 6:12-14). In this sense I am committed to see my sin as God sees it, and to ask for His help to overcome it day by day.

I have asked God’s forgiveness because of the way I have shared the gospel in the past, focusing more in the love of God as the basis for the salvation, while I was ignoring His holiness and justice, and was leading people to trust in a profession of faith that lacked the basic and real meaning of the cross…that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them (2 Cor 5:19), not just because of His love, but because of His justice, because that was the only way to be reconciled to Him.

And now I can praise God for His indescribable gift of salvation and I should always remember that “our [my] debt is so great, [that] only a divine sacrifice could pay it.”[36] I am no longer under condemnation (Col 2:13), the wrath of God has been fully satisfied in Christ (Jn 19:30), I have been rescued from the domain of darkness, having been transferred into the kingdom of God (Col 1:13), and now I am justified, that means that my legal position before God is that I have been declared just, righteous, because of the imputation of Christ righteousness to me (Phi 3:9, Rom 3:24, 5:9,19). Thank you!!!

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Barrick, William D. “Penal Substitution in the Old Testament.” The Master’s Seminary Journal 20/2 (Fall 2009) http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj20g.pdf (accessed October 31, 2013).

Bray, Gerald, God is Love. Wheaton, Ill: Crossway, 2012.

Brunner, Emil, the Mediator. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1947.

Campbell, J. McLeod. The Nature of the Atonement. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1996.

Catechism of the Catholic Church http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm (accessed November 3, 2013)

Chafer. Lewis Sperry. Major Bible Themes. Grand Rapids, MI: Dunham Publishing Company, 1968.

Charnock, Stephen. Christ Crucified. United Kingdom: Christian Focus Publications, Ltd, 2013.

Clark. Gordon H. The Atonement. Jefferson, MD: The Trinity Foundation, 1987.

Cleave, Derek. 1 Peter. Great Britain: Christian Focus, 1999.

Culpepper, Robert H. Interpreting the Atonement. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1966.

Demarest, Bruce. The Cross and Salvation. Illinois: Crossway Books, 1997.

Easton, M.G. Easton’s Bible dictionary. New York: Harper & Brothers. Logos Research, Inc, 1893.

Gariepy, Henry. 100 Portraits of Christ. USA: SP Publications, Inc, 1987.

Greene, Colin. Atonement Today. Edited by John Goldingay. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1995.

Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994.

Jeffery, Steve, Michael Ovey, and Andrew Sach. Pierced for Our Transgressions Wheaton, Ill: Crossway, 2007.

Swann. J.T Sacrifice in the Old Testament. (J. D. Barry & L. Wentz, Eds.)The Lexham Bible Dictionary. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software (pag 180 ver)

Krummacher. F.W. The Martyr Lamb. Grand Rapids: MI: Baker Book House, 1978.

Lauersdorf, Rochard. E. Hebrews. St Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House, 1992.

MacArthur, John F. Justified by Faith. Panorama City, CA: Word of Grace Communications, 1984.

MacArthur, John. Freedom from Sin. Panorama City, CA: Word of Grace Communications, 1987

MacArthur, John. The MacArthur Study Bible. Dallas, TX: Thomas Nelson, 2006

McCarthy, James. The Gospel According to Rome. Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1996.

Mayhue, L. Richard. “The Scriptural Necessity of Christ’s Penal Substitution” The Master’s Seminary Journal 20/02 (September 1, 2009): 147 (accessed November 01, 2013)

Manser, M. H. Dictionary of Bible Themes.London: Martin Manser. Logos research, Inc, 2009).

Morey, Robert. A. Studies in the Atonement. Shermans Dale, PA: Christian Scholars Press, 1989.

Morgan, Christopher W., and Robert A. Peterson, eds. The Deity of Christ. Wheaton, Ill: Crossway, 2011

Morris, Leon “Theories of Atonement.” Elwell Evangelical Dictionary. http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/atonementmorris2.html (accessed November 1, 2013).

Morris, Leon. Basic Christian Doctrines. Edited by Henry F. H. USA: Holt Rinehart Winston, 1962.

Newell, William R. Hebrews. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Classics, 1995.

Packer. J.I. In My Place Condemned He Stood. Wheaton, Ill: Crossway Books, 2007.

Piper, John. The Justification of God. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1993.

Piper, John. The Passion of Jesus Christ. Wheaton, Ill: Crossway Books, 2004.

Pink, A.W. The Doctrine of Reconciliation. Grand Rapids, MI: Associated Publishers and Authors.

Pope Pio XII, Mediator Dei, 68 http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_20111947_mediator-dei_en.html  (accessed November 05, 2013)

Reymond, Robert L. Jesus Divine Messiah. Scotland: Christian Focus Publications, 2003

Schilder. K. Christ in His Suffering. Grand Rapids, MI: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing. Co,1942.

Shaw, Ian J. and Brian H. Edwards, The Divine Substitute. Leominster, England: Day One, 2006.

Smeaton, George. The Doctrine of Atonement. Winona Lake, IN: Alpha Publications, 1979.

Smith, James E. The Pentateuch. Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Company, 1993.

Spurgeon, Charles. “An Unalterable Law”, sermon No. 3418, (preached at the Metropolitan Tabernacle 1914), http://www.spurgeongems.org/vols58-60/chs3418.pdf (accessed October 29,2013)

Spurgeon, Charles H. Spurgeon’s Sermons Volume 1. Christian Classic Ethereal Library. 1855

Spurgeon, Charles H. “Particular Redemption.” (preached at the Music Hall, Royal Surrey Gardens 1858), http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0181.htm (accessed November 09, 2013)

Turrettin, Francis. The Atonement of Christ. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1999.

Vine. W.E. Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1997. (26,27 y 28son citas Ibid)

Zwemer. Samuel. M. The Glory of the Cross. London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, Ltd,1935.

Food Notes

[1] Emil Brunner, the Mediator (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1947), 435.

[2] Leon Morris. “Theories of Atonement” in (Elwell Evangelical Dictionary) http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/atonementmorris2.html (accessed November 1, 2013).

[3] Gerald Bray, God is Love (Wheaton, Ill: Crossway,2012),589.

[4] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), 582.

[5] Emphasis mine

[6] Colin Greene, “Is the Message of the Cross Good News for the Twentieth Century?” In Atonement Today, ed.  John Goldingay (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1995), 231.

[7] The institution of the Eucharist  No 1339  http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm

[8] Catechism of the Catholic Church, The celebration of the Christian Mystery No 1367, 1323, 1382 http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm

[9] Steve Jeffery, Michael Ovey, and Andrew Sach, Pierced for Our Transgressions: Rediscovering

the Glory of Penal Substitution (Wheaton, Ill: Crossway, 2007), 103.

[10] Naomichi Masaki, “Contemporary Views on Atonement in Light of the Lutheran Confessions,” (Concordia Theological Quarterly 72/4, 2008) 314

^[11] John T. Swann, “Sacrifice in the Old Testament,” ed. John D. Barry and Lazarus Wentz, The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2012).

^[12] M. G. Easton, Easton’s Bible Dictionary (New York: Harper & Brothers, Logos Bible Software, 1893).

[13] Steve Jeffery, Michael Obey, and Andrew Sach, Pierced For Our Transgressions: Rediscovering the Glory of Penal Substitution. (Illinois: Crossway Books, 2007), 34.

[14] The character of God, His law, the nature of sin and the need of salvation for men

[15] It is not my intention to address the subject of the extension in this paper due to the lack of space, however I will say that I believe the Bible teaches a limited atonement which means that Christ came to die for those who would be saved (Eph 1:4; John 6:37-40; Col 2:14).

[16] Sacrifice, reconciliation, propitiation and redemption, that will be explain through the paper.

[17] It is final, satisfying, sufficient, and complete.

^[18] Martin H. Manser, Dictionary of Bible Themes: The Accessible and Comprehensive Tool for Topical Studies (London: Martin Manser, 2009).

[19] James E, Smith. The Pentateuch. (Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Company, 1993), 366.

[20] Steve Jeffery, Michael Obey, and Andrew Sach, Pierced For Our Transgressions: Rediscovering the Glory of Penal Substitution. (Illinois: Crossway Books, 2007) 34

[21] The chatolic view of the Passover is different. The institution of the Eucharist No 1340 http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a3.htm

[22] Robert, A Morey, Studies in the Atonement, (Shermans Dale, PA: Christian Scholars Press, 1989), 40.

[23] William D. Barrick, “Penal Substitution in the Old Testament,”  The Master’s Seminary Journal 20/2 (Fall 2009) http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj20g.pdf (accessed October 31, 2013).

[24] Bruce Demarest, the Cross and Salvation: The Doctrine of Salvation (Illinois: Crossway Books, 1997), 170.

[25] Spurgeon, Charles. An Unalterable Law, sermon No. 3418, (preached at the Metropolitan Tabernacle in 1914), http://www.spurgeongems.org/vols58-60/chs3418.pdf (accessed October 29,2013)

[26] The Catholic Church teaches that in the mass, the sacrifice of the altar “is no mere empty commemoration of the passion and death of Jesus Christ, but a true and proper act of sacrifice, whereby the High Priest by an unbloody immolation offers Himself a most acceptable victim to the Eternal Father, as He did upon the cross…now offers it by the ministry of His priests, who then offered Himself on the cross, the manner of offering alone being different.” Pope Pio XII, Mediator Dei, 68 http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_20111947_mediator-dei_en.html  (accessed November 05, 2013)

[27] W.E Vine. Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1997), 726-727.

[28] In the same way that the OT sacrificial animals were free of defect representing the sinless of Christ

[29] Ibid. 513

[30] Ibid. 514

[31] Ibid. 492

[32] J.I Packer, In My Place Condemned He Stood: Celebrating the Glory of the atonement, (Wheaton, Ill: Crossway Books, 2007), 36.

[33] Gerald,Bray, God is Love ( Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway,2012)591

[34] Richard L. Mayhue, “The Scriptural Necessity of Christ’s Penal Substitution” Master’s Seminary Journal 20, no. 2 (September 1, 2009): 147 (Accessed November 01, 2013)

[35] William D. Barrick, “Penal Substitution in the Old Testament,” The Master’s Seminary Journal 20/2 (Fall 2009) http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj20g.pdf (accessed October 31, 2013).

[36] John Piper The Passion of Jesus Christ.  (Wheaton, Ill: Crossway Books,2004) 28