Did Christ actually suffer eternal torment on our behalf?

[makesends]

Birth is introduction of life.

Rebirth is the "resurrection" (re-impartation) of eternal life within our immortal human spirit.

I suggest it is the meaning of the "first resurrection" in Rev 20:4-6.

You may be right there! I hadn't really thought of putting it that way!

Maybe when I mention a concept not clear to you, you should stop me then and there and have me explain it, because all this stuff is so familiar to me, I do not realize it is not the same to everyone else.

Well, there is that, and well said. But there is also sometimes, what is common to all of us —the easy answer that, to the one giving it, seems like a whole answer, not realizing that probably they alone see the implications or meanings of what they have said, and not realizing thoughts that others might infer from how it is said. Part of being human, I guess...

I was just about to say, that when I see a concept not clear to me, I'm not able to stop you there and then, because it is not in the nature of this online speaking to do that. But then I realized, you often do speak some, in one post, and continue the thought in another. So, ok, I will interrupt you if I can. But I don't want to take your mind off track.

I'm beginning to appreciate more and more my grounding in orthodox theology.

Amen that!

 

[Arial]

Very well put. Thank you.

So does the fact it was imputed sin (and I agree with that), deny or define what it means by saying, "He became sin..."?

"He became sin---" is an expression that represents His act as substitutionary. It does not mean that He became sin or sinful, otherwise death would have been able to hold Him. The punishment for our sins was applied to Him, in an effectual way on His person. Just as we do not become actually perfectly righteous, but continue committing some sins simply because of our nature and the fact that we still live in a sinful world, and have temptations all around us and in us. We never however live a lifestyle of unrepentant sin. But by grace and through faith it is Christ's righteousness that stands as our judge and justifier. Our sins have met God's penalty for them in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They can no longer condemn us to face the wrath of God. It has been done for us.

 

[Arial]

Agreed. But in the human use of "event" we tend to think of "begun and done" time passage. While I agree it is indeed an event, the time passage is irrelevant. It is causal, both in the work of God to do it, and in the necessary effects resulting, which to us we still see as time-sequence as if that gives it definition. I'm not so sure that 'time' is at all relevant, but causal sequence is. But, what's the brain to do with that thought, now?

I am not sure what you are saying.

I do not know if I understand what you mean by causal sequence in relation to the new birth. If when we hear the gospel we believe it that is because we have been reborn. This rebirth is the beginning of a journey that lasts however long it lasts, and our destination is Home. "The Long Road Home." We are strangers here. The journey includes all our life events but we are led by the Holy Spirit, the gift from Christ to us to guide us safely Home. We learn more and more of God along the way, draw nearer and nearer to Him, are sanctified step by step.

But this new birth does not come about in the same manner for all people, with the exception that in all cases it is hearing and believing the gospel. (And here I must make a side note to @ReverendRV, that I too believe there are exceptions to this at least in the case of infants, or the mentally handicapped, or some with limited capacity for comprehension. The parameters of this being known only by God, and nevertheless under His sovereign will, still contained within election, and purely for His purposes and glory).

What I mean by the new birth does not come about in the same manner for all people, is that it comes about in the manner and exact time and circumstances as is determined the perfect way for each individual. In fact, for those who are elect, I think every thing about their life, when and where they are born, who their parents are, where they live, how they live, even the sin He allows but does not cause, are leading straight to this moment in time (to us) when we hear His voice and follow Him. Our election and God's involvement in our entire life is so intensely personal---"I know your name and where you live" personal, so personal that all those centuries ago when Jesus hung on that cross He knew each and every one of us---by name and everything about us and died for us anyway, as to be mind boggling, and breathtaking, and so humbling that to contemplate it makes it impossible to rise from off our knees.

 

[Eleanor]

"He became sin---" is an expression that represents His act as substitutionary. It does not mean that He became sin or sinful, otherwise death would have been able to hold Him.

Agreed. . .If he became sin, he could not have been the perfect sacrifice required to atone.
He became our sin-bearer, as the sacrificial animals were sin-bearers.

The punishment for our sins was applied to Him, in an effectual way on His person. Just as we do not become actually perfectly righteous, but continue committing some sins

May I interject to point out that righteousness/justification is imputed to us, not imparted to us,
that it is a declaration of "not guity," a sentence of acquittal, a finding by God's court of right standing with his justice; i.e. penalty paid, time served, clean record.
It is a forensic righteousness, not an actual righteousness.
Actual righteousness is by obedience in the Holy Spirit which leads to sanctification leading to holiness (Ro 6:16-19)

simply because of our nature and the fact that we still live in a sinful world, and have temptations all around us and in us. We never however live a lifestyle of unrepentant sin. But by grace and through faith it is Christ's righteousness that stands as our judge and justifier. Our sins have met God's penalty for them in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They can no longer condemn us to face the wrath of God. It has been done for us.

Amen!

 

[Eleanor]

makesends said:
There is an awful lot we don't know. I've heard several different takes on the relationship of body, soul, spirit, mind, consciousness, conscience, etc, in a human, but never in complete agreement with the others. We just don't know. I'm not saying that we know nothing, but how can we know how God's judgement of us works, and how things will be concerning these, when our eyes are opened and our bodies glorified, our very selves changed? And more remotely, how can we know what, exactly, it is, that goes to Hell? How do we know quite what death is, that is thrown into the LOF? What are the implications of Death and Hell being thrown into the LOF? We don't know much. It's easier to say what we think it is not, than what it is.

I often find myself realizing @Eleanor is onto something, but unable to present it comprehensively, or sometimes even compellingly. So far, I agree with you, concerning the regeneration of Christ, and my objections to what she said are not resolved.
I'm not sure which you are asking about —the first paragraph above, or the second, in particular, what objections I have that are not resolved?
I was thinking of the fact I hadn't gotten your answer yet to my questions concerning what you said, that sounded like Jesus needed redemption, which you do resolve for me below, and that, in beautiful fashion. I love it.

I was asking about your unresolved objections,

Your logic is impeccable here, though I find it necessary to point out to anyone reading, that when you say, "Jesus did not suffer spiritual death (loss of life within his immortal human spirit) on the cross", it does not mean that he did not pay our penalty in hell. I think, at least, that I do not hear you saying that his physical death alone was the payment.

Oh, wow! I've never thought of him paying our penalty in hell. Where do we find that in Scripture?

Eph 4:8-10?
Paul is enlarging on v.7; i.e., "to each one of us, grace has been given as Christ apportioned it,"
supporting it with Ps 68:18, "he ascended on high. . .and gave gifts to men,"
whereupon he reminds his readers of
Christ's coming to earth (incarnation)--"he descended to the lower earthly regions," (v.9)
and of his resurrection and ascension--"he ascended on high." (v.9).
The one who descended (incarnation) is the one who ascended (v.10) to give gifts to men, some to be apostles, some to be prophets. . .(v.11).

There is no Jesus going to hell there.

1 Pe 3:18-20?
"he went to preach to the spirits in prison"

That does not suggest his suffering for sin.

In addition to appreciating my grounding in orthodox theology, I find myself also appreciating the way the IRS trained agents to recognize the counterfeit. And that was not by learning about all the counterfeits to enable them to spot them, but simply by learning the genuine so well they could spot the counterfeit with ease.

 

[Josheb]

I hesitate to reply to this op because I find some element of error in almost every post and am loathe to post lest the post be found likewise.


First, I will suggest any suffering that occurred be considered from the Divine point of view, not the temporal, especially since the question has to do with "eternal" suffering. Assuming the Trinity (Christ's divinity and the unity of thought, affect, purpose, volition, and experience of the Godhead), the God's/Christ's experience is much, much different than our own.

I'm sure it hurt like the proverbial h-e-double-toothpicks to have nails driven through one's flesh, muscle, sinew. All the more so after having been scourged (and possibly sodomized) and have a ring of thorns thrust down into one's scalp. I'm just as confident hauling a timber upon which I'd soon be hanging the 12 or 13 miles near naked on a bloodied back where the muscled had been flayed apart hurt. Let's not forget all your friends who said they'd have your back have abandoned you. No one left to defend you. I don't imagine the psychological suffering having everyone in town come out to watch, mock, ridicule and profane me would be any less injurious.

But I do know it is temporal, and therefore temporary.

I wonder, in contrast, what it would be like to have the sins of everyone who ever lived, is currently living, and will ever live be heaped on me. Having come to know and understand Christ ever so slightly in his holiness and absolute sinlessness, I can barely tolerate my own iniquity without making excuses lest I come unglued. All my sin was poured on that abused person. Every bit of sin from every single reader was heaped on top of my own being heaped on him. Consider the revulsion of rot piled upon you, the stench of decay attempting to smother the eternal logos of God made flesh.

No wonder he sweat blood the evening prior.

So go pound a railroad tie through your foot and get back to me on the matter of eternal suffering.

But before you do return, get scourged. Have someone whip you with a whip into which stones and pieces of glass had been sown, and have them whip you until the muscle is made mush. Then get back to me.

Oops! I forgot. You gotta walk from Capitol Hill in DC to the Beltway in your underwear carrying a six-foot timber weighing almost as much as you do while people mock you. Then get back to me.



And REMEMBER: this memory of the experience will always be there in your mind.



Or will it?

Jesus still bore the marks of puncture when he appeared to Thomas. He still bears the wounds according to Revelation. Has he forgotten being abandoned by his friends, the beating, the mockery, the sheer magnitude of wretched depravity into which he was made? I doubt it.

He has forgiven all of it. I doubt he has forgotten any of it.

 

[Josheb]

This op asks about eternal suffering. Properly understood, eternity is endless in all directions. There's no before or after, start or end. There is only the perpetual now. So, I ask everyone if they think there was suffering prior to God creating. If the answer is, "No," then so to is the answer to whether or not Jesus actually suffered eternal torment.

But then there's that pesky problem of memory. If Jesus remembers any of it (and the book of Revelation would seem to indicate that is the case), and he is eternal, then the suffering never goes away. I, therefore, suggest the better way to understand it is the endless suffering that experience contains.

But I will also suggest that particular set of sufferings was God working good according to His purpose so maybe, from the divine perspective, it was all rather an exciting adventure in which a great victory was achieved. In a single moment all of creation was changed.

 

[Arial]

May I interject to point out that righteousness/justification is imputed to us, not imparted to us,

In the sentence that you quoted did I not just present an imputed righteousness, making clear it was not imparted? As to justification. That is not imputed it is actual. It is a judicial declaration. Our faith in the person and work of Jesus justifies us. Romans 5:1 Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.
Romans 5:9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son,much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

 

[Eleanor]

My bad then. Maybe I'm overly protective of @Eleanor

Thank you very much, but you don't know you are overly protective of Eleanor until she tells you that you are.

 

[makesends]

"He became sin---" is an expression that represents His act as substitutionary. It does not mean that He became sin or sinful, otherwise death would have been able to hold Him. The punishment for our sins was applied to Him, in an effectual way on His person. Just as we do not become actually perfectly righteous, but continue committing some sins simply because of our nature and the fact that we still live in a sinful world, and have temptations all around us and in us. We never however live a lifestyle of unrepentant sin. But by grace and through faith it is Christ's righteousness that stands as our judge and justifier. Our sins have met God's penalty for them in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They can no longer condemn us to face the wrath of God. It has been done for us.

Here's another example of something told us, for our consideration, that I don't think we can be certain we understand. To say that "he became sin" for us, implies that we were sin, in some sense, (perhaps corporately?) But we don't know what it means. It may well have implications into the depths of how it is possible for God to cause that there be sin, but not be the author of sin. Our glib responses are sometimes too glib, I think.

We don't know if death would have been able to hold him. It only seems mathematically accurate to our minds.

 

[Eleanor]

In the sentence that you quoted did I not just present an imputed righteousness, making clear it was not imparted? As to justification. That is not imputed it is actual. It is a judicial declaration.

Righteousness (justification) was imputed to Abraham by faith (Ge 15:6, Ro 4:3), and it is imputed by faith to those in Christ (Ro 4:1-11).

The Greek meaning of dikaiosis (justification) is "declaration, sentence, finding of right standing with the Court;" i.e., penalty paid, time served, clean record.
It is forensic, not personal. It is in regard to guilt, not actual righteousness.

 

[Arial]

Here's another example of something told us, for our consideration, that I don't think we can be certain we understand. To say that "he became sin" for us, implies that we were sin, in some sense, (perhaps corporately?) But we don't know what it means. It may well have implications into the depths of how it is possible for God to cause that there be sin, but not be the author of sin. Our glib responses are sometimes too glib, I think.

We don't know if death would have been able to hold him. It only seems mathematically accurate to our minds.

I think you are being too literal when you take his becoming sin implies that we were sin. It is a figure of speech. But thanks for the implication that my thought out and articulated post was glib.

We do know that death could not hold Him. It didn't. It isn't a matter of seeming mathematically accurate or in anyway related to anything mathematical. We have the word of God as witness.

 

[Arial]

Righteousness (justification)

Righteousness and justification are not the same thing. If you read the scriptures I gave and maybe address them, since that is where the answer to this question is (sola scriptura) you will see that. They say we ARE justified NOW. But obviously we are not perfectly righteous NOW.

It is forensic, not personal. It is in regard to guilt, not actual righteousness.

It is forensic. God declares us justified.
It is personal. Romans 8:30 Those He predestined, He also called; those He called, He also justified;
Romans 5:1 Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Do we have peace with God now? You bet. Does it say those who will be justified? Nope. It says have been.

You know, for someone who is constantly saying they go by sola scriptura I don't think you have ever put forth any scripture related to anything you have said. Or addressed any that are given.

Scripture does tell us that righteousness is imputed. It never tells us that justification is imputed.

 

[makesends]

I was asking about your unresolved objections,

Oh, wow! I've never thought of him paying our penalty in hell. Where do we find that in Scripture?

Eph 4:8-10?
Paul is enlarging on v.7; i.e., "to each one of us, grace has been given as Christ apportioned it,"
supporting it with Ps 68:18, "he ascended on high. . .and gave gifts to men,"
whereupon he reminds his readers of
Christ's coming to earth (incarnation)--"he descended to the lower earthly regions," (v.9)
and of his resurrection and ascension--"he ascended on high." (v.9).
The one who descended (incarnation) is the one who ascended (v.10) to give gifts to men, some to be apostles, some to be prophets. . .(v.11).

There is no Jesus going to hell there.

1 Pe 3:18-20?
"he went to preach to the spirits in prison"

That does not suggest his suffering for sin.

In addition to appreciating my grounding in orthodox theology, I find myself also appreciating the way the IRS trained agents to recognize the counterfeit. And that was not by learning about all the counterfeits to enable them to spot them, but simply by learning the genuine so well they could spot the counterfeit with ease.

I supposed it only by way of acknowledging that he indeed PAID, by ACTUAL COMPLETE SUBSTITUTION. He endured the punishment, in every detail, I think, that we would have had to. I do not mean that it had to be in hell or the LOF, or wherever. I have only supposed it so for lack of other reference. I don't know how it was done except to believe that it was so in every way and every detail. And that, I don't consider possible in mere physical death, no worse physically, than the death some others have had to go through, though I do think his mental anguish was worse than that of any other human.

 

[makesends]

I think you are being too literal when you take his becoming sin implies that we were sin. It is a figure of speech. But thanks for the implication that my thought out and articulated post was glib.

We do know that death could not hold Him. It didn't. It isn't a matter of seeming mathematically accurate or in anyway related to anything mathematical. We have the word of God as witness.

We all are too glib. I didn't mean it to criticize you, but to explain my reticence.

I'm not so sure it is only a figure of speech, that "he became sin".

Yes, we do know that death could not hold him. I wasn't arguing about that. But you said that if he was actually (not just as a figure of speech) become sin, death could have held him. I don't think we can know that, and infer then that he did not actually become sin for us.

 

[makesends]

I am not sure what you are saying.

I do not know if I understand what you mean by causal sequence in relation to the new birth. If when we hear the gospel we believe it that is because we have been reborn. This rebirth is the beginning of a journey that lasts however long it lasts, and our destination is Home. "The Long Road Home." We are strangers here. The journey includes all our life events but we are led by the Holy Spirit, the gift from Christ to us to guide us safely Home. We learn more and more of God along the way, draw nearer and nearer to Him, are sanctified step by step.

God as first cause, has caused all subsequent fact. Not only does he cause regeneration, but he also through it causes its subsequent effects. I'm saying that to my mind this is reliable fact, specifically intending that logical sequence: God - election - regeneration - faith. The temporal view dependent on time sequence, particularly our "experience" of it, are not dependable, and at best are a far secondary.

But this new birth does not come about in the same manner for all people, with the exception that in all cases it is hearing and believing the gospel. (And here I must make a side note to @ReverendRV, that I too believe there are exceptions to this at least in the case of infants, or the mentally handicapped, or some with limited capacity for comprehension. The parameters of this being known only by God, and nevertheless under His sovereign will, still contained within election, and purely for His purposes and glory).

I don't think there are exceptions, unless to our mental notions of the delivery of the Gospel. The Gospel is at the core of the fact of very existence of the creature, even of creation. God can open any of our eyes to see it, even through nature.

What I mean by the new birth does not come about in the same manner for all people, is that it comes about in the manner and exact time and circumstances as is determined the perfect way for each individual. In fact, for those who are elect, I think every thing about their life, when and where they are born, who their parents are, where they live, how they live, even the sin He allows but does not cause, are leading straight to this moment in time (to us) when we hear His voice and follow Him. Our election and God's involvement in our entire life is so intensely personal---"I know your name and where you live" personal, so personal that all those centuries ago when Jesus hung on that cross He knew each and every one of us---by name and everything about us and died for us anyway, as to be mind boggling, and breathtaking, and so humbling that to contemplate it makes it impossible to rise from off our knees.

Amen that!

 

[Runningman]

In another thread, @Eleanor said:
"To posit that the purpose of Christ's brutal atoning death included anything else that was less,
that anything less would apply to all without exception, and of no faith,
contrary to the Biblical testimony of the meaning of blood sacrifice as presented in the OT sacrifices and in authoritative NT apostolic teaching,
is to hi-jack Christ's atonement for the sake of serving your personal theology,
altering the terms of his sacrifice, both in meaning (expiation) and application (by belief in him), which is
as grievous a misrepresentation of this sacred reality as were the false charges against him.
To attempt to manipulate such a staggering Christian foundational reality, all for the sake of one's own personal theology,
betrays an insufficient apprehension of the cross."

I'm not sure I'm understanding her right, but it seems she implies that Christ's physical death is all that was required as payment for our sin. I have heard that before —in fact, I will never forget the look on my own mother's face when she said, "...are you saying that Christ went to [everlasting torment] in our place???"

Yes, I think he did. Did he actually die spiritually in our place? In a sense, yes, in that he did pay our penalty of 'everlasting' death, which to my mind is both temporally physical, and eternally physical and spiritual. But God cannot be killed. Being eternal/infinite, Christ was not defeated there. Note that it says that God raised him from the dead (Acts 2:24, Romans 8:11), and not that he raised himself, though he was himself God. (This is part of my reasoning why I suppose the "eternal" punishment may best be understood by us to be a matter of infinity of degree, rather than an eternal extension of time —well, that, and the notion I carry, for other reasons, that it will be happening outside this temporal envelope we inhabit.) (This is also why I insist, not only in his resurrection, but on his payment of our sin, that he HAD to be God himself. No creature can bear that penalty and 'survive'.) Here also, I think we see beautiful demonstration, of the unity of the Godhead and relationship of the persons of the Trinity, and of God's power —able to go to, or even beyond, the edge of disaster, and that, intentionally, but come out of it the victor.

There are many examples of others that have suffered worse physically, and died more (physically) horribly. I don't think that any suffered more psychologically/emotionally/mentally —but to the limits of their endurance, or even beyond, yes. But, regardless, the protests I have heard against it being more than his physical death, to me, truncate the meaning of Adam's disobedience and the curse, in both what has been imputed to us, and what we deserve in our rebellion. Our debt is not paid off in our physical death.

To me, it seems an awful stretch to say that his physical death alone was what saves us. But that is me, and something I have pretty much always assumed, and as far as I know, has not been proven wrong. I think he went to Hell/'Death'/Lake of Fire and suffered every bit the intensity of the punishment we owe —death— time irrelevant. But I admit to much of my view being by my reasoning from Scripture, and am open to better thinking.

Thoughts?

It creates a major problem for a literal interpretation of the doctrine of eternal conscious torment, at minimum.

 

[Eleanor]

Here's another example of something told us, for our consideration, that I don't think we can be certain we understand. To say that "he became sin" for us, implies that we were sin, in some sense, (perhaps corporately?) But we don't know what it means. It may well have implications into the depths of how it is possible for God to cause that there be sin, but not be the author of sin. Our glib responses are sometimes too glib, I think.

We don't know if death would have been able to hold him. It only seems mathematically accurate to our minds.

It does not mean that he "became "sin, for that would have disqualified him as the perfect sacrifice.

God dealt with him as he must deal with sin, and Christ fulfilled the meaning of the OT guilt offering.

 

[fastfredy0]

One way to put it would go something like this: That God's very nature is so "literal" that his love implies self-sacrifice. (One might even get that idea (and several other themes), from the physical principle of entropy.) This notion fits very well with many other ideas, such as in the Simplicity of God, that he does not have to consider or even decide, but instead, that for him, to be is to act. For me, it also renders many Scripture passages more than simply conceptual or abstract.

Sorry... you will have to go slower for me ... giggle ... perhaps with specifics.

It is one of my happy thoughts, though painful with the irony, that God "from eternity past", knowing the horror and pain, not only allowed for it but planned it in every unhappy detail —he CAUSED it

Complete agreement.

For eg, no matter whether I have wasted time, even years, in unGodly pursuits, the time "lost" is not wasted time; God has not wasted it —he used it and I am precisely where he had planned all along for me to be at this moment.)

Agreed. We 99% of the time we look at thing from our perspective; how does it affect ME; it's all about ME. That's not what it's all about. It's about God; about His pleasure. Hopefully, my pleasure from my perspective is a side affect of His pleasure. Being In Christ would satisfy that wish.
Arminians see about everything from man's point of view; us Reformed guys probably got it down to 95% (giggle)

 

[makesends]

It creates a major problem for a literal interpretation of the doctrine of eternal conscious torment, at minimum.

How so?