PSA: What is Implied in Christ's Substitution; What Death Did He Die?

[Josheb]

Part 1:

When I was growing up, it never entered my mind that Christ's death on the cross was only the passing of his physical life. I always assumed that he suffered every bit the penalty I would have had to pay, to include the infinite ('eternal') suffering of Hell and the Lake of Fire.......... But, I have no recourse but to think that Christ died precisely the death that all the redeemed would have died.

Was the 'mere', 'simple', fact of his temporal suffering and physical death, all that happened here?

Let's start with what is stated in scripture.

Acts 2:29-32 ESV
“Brothers, I may say to you with confidence about the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants on his throne, he foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption. This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses."

The promise(s) of God included the promise Christ's body would not decay in the grave and it would not be abandoned in the grave. So, no, Jesus' death was not exactly like that of those who sin. However, it's also critically important to understand death because everyone dies and everyone still rots in the grave, their body decomposing. Everybody also gets resurrected.

John 5:25-32
"Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in himself; and He gave him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment. I can do nothing on my own initiative. As I hear, I judge; and my judgment is just, because I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me. If I alone testify about myself, my testimony is not true. There is another who testifies of me, and I know that the testimony which He gives about me is true."

One resurrection with two different destinations. Technically, everyone also faces judgement, but the saints are not condemned (see John 3:18-19 and Rom. 8:1), so what Jesus is speaking of is the resurrection to life and the resurrection to condemnation, or..... to be even more accurate still, the resurrection to life and the resurrection to sentencing for the just recompense of sin. Paul worded it this way in Galatians,

Galatians 6:7-8
Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.


So... the decay of the physical body in the grave's earth should not be conflated or confused with the rotting that occurs when sentenced.

One last note and then I will pick up the matter of death prior to the event of sin's entrance into the world in a separate post.

When we speak of death we should not separate death from life. No one would die if s/he hadn't first lived and while Christ's death is critically important to our salvation and the matter of atonement (at-one-ment), it is his life that matters more. Had there been no incarnation there'd be no death. Had there been no obedience any death would have never contributed anything toward salvation. God is God of both the living and the dead. In his Corinthian exposition on the resurrection (to life), Paul wrote,

1 Corinthians 15:20-22
But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.

Not all are made alive reaping eternal life. Most are made alive to reap a sentence of the condemned.

 

[Josheb]

Part 2:

Adam and Eve were made mortal.

There was never a moment in human existence when humanity, individually and collectively were not physically mortal. This is reported in 1 Corinthians 15.

1 Corinthians 15:42-54
So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. So also it is written, "The first man, Adam, became a living being." The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual. The first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man is from heaven. As is the earthy, so also are those who are earthy; and as is the heavenly, so also are those who are heavenly. Just as we have borne the image of the earthy, we will also bear the image of the heavenly. Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, "Death is swallowed up in victory."


Had Paul been referring solely to the post-disobedient or sinful condition he would have written "perished" or "corrupted." From the beginning, it was apportioned for humans to live once and then face judgment (Heb. 9:27). Logically, we also understand the existence and the necessity of death because there'd be no planting and reaping a harvest without death. Unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit (Jn. 12:24). Without this cycle of seeds being buried in the ground, becoming new plants that, in turn, produce more seeds before dying and fertilizing the ground for the next seed planted, there'd be no harvest and God's command to Adam and Eve would have meant Adam would have had to plant every individual seed for every individual plant that covered the then-desolate earth. Nature would not have worked with Adam. Trees and plants and mosses all would be immortal, never dying, and the richness of the soil that comes from the decay of biological material would not exist. The purpose of worms and the other bugs that feast on death and rot would be entirely different. No bugs (or any other animal) would die and the earth would quickly be overpopulated with swarms and herds vying for space and fodder.

Therefore, when Romans 8 speaks of sin entering creation as a consequence of sin, the context is the death of sin entered at that point when Adam disobeyed God. Many call it "spiritual death," but scripture simply states it as "dead in transgressions and sins," (which, btw, are not identical or synonymous terms). Adam and Eve were made mortal and had they never partaken of the fruit of the tree of life they have both died physically. Scripture is silent in regard to what might have happened then, but we know, by inference, that Jesus was always going to incarnate, live, die, resurrect, and ascend..... to provide for the resurrection of the dead (either to eternal life or eternal destruction). There is no way to the Father but through Jesus (Jn. 14:6). Some like to imagine the fruit of the tree of life would have prolonged life so the person never died but that would run into conflict with the aforementioned Hebrews 9:27. For all we know, eating from the tree of life might have killed the person whereby they would then resurrect simply as a life-giving function of that fruit! What we know is that Adam and Eve were made mortal and they were always going to die one way or another and that was a function of God's creative design that He called "very good."

It is a good thing to die sinless .

 

[Carbon]

I think you're right, Carbon. We are reconciled to God, yes, but God is also reconciled to us. We were once hostile to God, refusing to submit to his word and unable to do so. But in Christ we are reconciled, which includes God being reconciled to us—we went from loving sin and hating God to hating sin and loving God. Our inner being now delights in his word as waters of life.

I'm glad someone else sees what I am trying to say.

 

[makesends]

DialecticSkeptic said:
I think you're right, Carbon. We are reconciled to God, yes, but God is also reconciled to us. We were once hostile to God, refusing to submit to his word and unable to do so. But in Christ we are reconciled, which includes God being reconciled to us—we went from loving sin and hating God to hating sin and loving God. Our inner being now delights in his word as waters of life.

I'm glad someone else sees what I am trying to say.

I can be wrong, but it seems you guys are conflating 'reconciled' with 'restored'.

It's not a big deal —doctrinally, we really are in agreement— but, "Details matter".

 

[makesends]

Part 1:

Let's start with what is stated in scripture.

Acts 2:29-32 ESV
“Brothers, I may say to you with confidence about the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants on his throne, he foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption. This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses."

The promise(s) of God included the promise Christ's body would not decay in the grave and it would not be abandoned in the grave. So, no, Jesus' death was not exactly like that of those who sin. However, it's also critically important to understand death because everyone dies and everyone still rots in the grave, their body decomposing. Everybody also gets resurrected.

John 5:25-32
"Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in himself; and He gave him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment. I can do nothing on my own initiative. As I hear, I judge; and my judgment is just, because I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me. If I alone testify about myself, my testimony is not true. There is another who testifies of me, and I know that the testimony which He gives about me is true."

One resurrection with two different destinations. Technically, everyone also faces judgement, but the saints are not condemned (see John 3:18-19 and Rom. 8:1), so what Jesus is speaking of is the resurrection to life and the resurrection to condemnation, or..... to be even more accurate still, the resurrection to life and the resurrection to sentencing for the just recompense of sin. Paul worded it this way in Galatians,

Galatians 6:7-8
Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.


So... the decay of the physical body in the grave's earth should not be conflated or confused with the rotting that occurs when sentenced.

One last note and then I will pick up the matter of death prior to the event of sin's entrance into the world in a separate post.

When we speak of death we should not separate death from life. No one would die if s/he hadn't first lived and while Christ's death is critically important to our salvation and the matter of atonement (at-one-ment), it is his life that matters more. Had there been no incarnation there'd be no death. Had there been no obedience any death would have never contributed anything toward salvation. God is God of both the living and the dead. In his Corinthian exposition on the resurrection (to life), Paul wrote,

1 Corinthians 15:20-22
But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.

Not all are made alive reaping eternal life. Most are made alive to reap a sentence of the condemned.

I see that I should have been more specific.

The rotting of the flesh, while I can't say it is irrelevant, is not the issue I intended here.

Is Christ's dying all that effected our salvation there, or was there more to his punishment? Did he suffer infinitely on our behalf, or only temporally? What happened?

My take has always been that he paid every bit what we would have, but since he is infinite God, the "grave could not hold him". (OT, perhaps, but it is my opinion (not conclusion) that what we habitually think of as "eternity in hell" is more a question of intensity, time-irrelevant.)

But, if time is not irrelevant, what happened during those 3 days he was 'gone'?

 

[makesends]

Have you factored in that He was Trichotomous? What about his Soul; was it forsaken?

Matthew 26:38 ("My soul is consumed with sorrow to the point of death"),

Lol, do you know enough to expand on that? If I was to do so, it could hardly even be called 'speculation'! But I'd like to hear your thoughts on it.

Do you at least agree that the punishment was at least equal what justice demands? Does that necessarily include some form of suffering, and can you speak to whether it was equal in form/kind as ours would have been, had justice been meted out to us?

 

[Josheb]

I see that I should have been more specific.

The rotting of the flesh, while I can't say it is irrelevant, is not the issue I intended here.

Is Christ's dying all that effected our salvation there, or was there more to his punishment? Did he suffer infinitely on our behalf, or only temporally? What happened?

Before I proceed, would you please make a short list of the things you believe are infinite?

My take has always been that he paid every bit what we would have, but since he is infinite God, the "grave could not hold him". (OT, perhaps, but it is my opinion (not conclusion) that what we habitually think of as "eternity in hell" is more a question of intensity, time-irrelevant.)

Welll.......

1. If you haven't done so, let me recommend a reading of "Four Views on Hell." There's two versions of that book I prefer the older one, although the arguments are basically the same in both.
2. "Hell" is probably not the word Jesus used, and even if he ever did resort to using Greek, Norse, Egyptian, or other pagan, Gentile terms, he was speaking of the grave and not some lesser god or demon of pagan mythology.
3. "Hell," whatever it may be, could be everlasting, but it is not eternal.

I, therefore, think the opinion expressed is flawed in several ways.

But, if time is not irrelevant, what happened during those 3 days he was 'gone'?

What does scripture state?

1 Peter 3:18-20
For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, who once were disobedient....

1 Peter 4:1-6
Therefore, since Christ has suffered in the flesh, arm yourselves also with the same purpose, because he who has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin, so as to live the rest of the time in the flesh no longer for the lusts of men, but for the will of God. For the time already past is sufficient for you to have carried out the desire of the Gentiles, having pursued a course of sensuality, lusts, drunkenness, carousing, drinking parties and abominable idolatries. In all this, they are surprised that you do not run with them into the same excesses of dissipation, and they malign you; but they will give account to Him who is ready to judge the living and the dead. For the gospel has for this purpose been preached even to those who are dead, that though they are judged in the flesh as men, they may live in the spirit according to the will of God.

If either of those populations (those then imprisoned and those physically dead) then he was extraordinarily busy. He spoke for three years and covered only the territory of the physically alive in Israel. Many, many more than that number resided imprisoned and dead (both physically and sinfully) in Sheol. Preaching to all of them in a mere three days is extraordinary.

I also wonder how time can be stipulated as irrelevant and then a qualification of three days be asserted? If taken exactly as written, that question is non-sensical.

 

[makesends]

Before I proceed, would you please make a short list of the things you believe are infinite?

1. God. 2. In only one sense, Sin, in that it is set against infinite God. 3. God's ultimate intention—not his temporal creation.

If either of those populations (those then imprisoned and those physically dead) then he was extraordinarily busy. He spoke for three years and covered only the territory of the physically alive in Israel. Many, many more than that number resided imprisoned and dead (both physically and sinfully) in Sheol. Preaching to all of them in a mere three days is extraordinary.

Are you asserting that those populations are in some way equivalent to the living? I don't want to complain of false equivalence, because I can't prove either way, but that sounds to me more like speculation than substantive thought.

I also wonder how time can be stipulated as irrelevant and then a qualification of three days be asserted? If taken exactly as written, that question is non-sensical.

Did you not see where I said "IF"? I don't claim to know all the why's of the three days. Quote that sentence you say is non-sensical exactly as written, but do so in context.

 

[ReverendRV]

Lol, do you know enough to expand on that? If I was to do so, it could hardly even be called 'speculation'! But I'd like to hear your thoughts on it.

Do you at least agree that the punishment was at least equal what justice demands? Does that necessarily include some form of suffering, and can you speak to whether it was equal in form/kind as ours would have been, had justice been meted out to us?

Yes, it would be equal in eternal endurance. Ours is from Creation (birth) to Everlasting Hell, Christ's is from Death to Eternity in his Essence, because his Divine Nature is Everlasting; though his Judgment was short lived. As to Severty of Wrath, even our levels of Hell can be different; so can his, as his Passion was different from what ours will be...

 

[makesends]

Yes, it would be equal in eternal endurance. Ours is from Creation (birth) to Everlasting Hell, Christ's is from Death to Eternity in his Essence, because his Divine Nature is Everlasting; though his Judgment was short lived. As to Severty of Wrath, even our levels of Hell can be different; so can his, as in his Passion was different from what ours will be...

I don't understand all that you are saying, but it sounds reasonable for the most part, but I'm not at all sure what you are saying about his Passion. Exactly what is that referring to, anyway? Most people think of it only as what he went through temporally, there, from perhaps Gethsemane to his 'giving up the ghost'.

 

[ReverendRV]

I don't understand all that you are saying, but it sounds reasonable for the most part, but I'm not at all sure what you are saying about his Passion. Exactly what is that referring to, anyway? Most people think of it only as what he went through temporally, there, from perhaps Gethsemane to his 'giving up the ghost'.

I mean that his Passion was his Hell...

Short lived, but as Eternal as he is; because of who he is. God would measure Christ's Eternality and Hell's Eternality; and come up with the same Measurement. But as we measure things, it lasted just the Easter season...

To God, a thousand years is as a day. To God, one Passion is as an Eternity in Hell...

 

[Hazelelponi]

I also wonder how time can be stipulated as irrelevant and then a qualification of three days be asserted? If taken exactly as written, that question is non-sensical

Jesus is Lord - He can preach to everyone in Sheol for the three earth days, all of them preached to at the same time and none of them needing to use the restroom or eat or rest...

Then back to earth to get everything situated and ready for the gift of the Holy Spirit, then they have the triumphal entry into heaven and start their millennium, while we build the church with the help of the Holy Spirit.

Yes?

 

[Josheb]

1. God. 2. In only one sense, Sin, in that it is set against infinite God. 3. God's ultimate intention—not his temporal creation.

Do you think there is a difference between "eternity," "infinite," and "everlasting"? If so, would you please provide a short definition of each that explains the terms and its difference(s) with the other two words?

Are you asserting that those populations are in some way equivalent to the living?

No.

I don't want to complain of false equivalence, because I can't prove either way, but that sounds to me more like speculation than substantive thought.

Let me clarify my earlier statement because I can see I left out a word.

If either of those populations (those then imprisoned and those physically dead) included people in hell, then he was extraordinarily busy.

Clearly, dead people are not living . No false equivalence is made.

Did you not see where I said "IF"?

Yes, what was it I was just told, "sounds to me more like speculation than substantive thought"? Yes, I did see the "if". I'll clarify my earlier post again because I said, "irrelevant" and not "not irrelevant," That was a typo done in haste. I did not mean to misrepresent the post. If three days are specified, then the relevance of time is redundant. You were saying if time is not irrelevant then time is relevant. You were saying if time is not irrelevant then time (three days) is relevant. I suspect something was going on in your thinking that didn't quite make it out of the keyboard as thought. Not a big deal, just making an observation.

I don't claim to know all the why's of the three days.

Right. No one does. Any answer anyone might offer will be speculative because scripture is silent as to the specifics of that matter. However, if we are going to speculate or hypothesize, it is best to start with what is explicitly stated in scripture. Which is exactly what I did.

If the imprisoned and dead populations to which Peter referred included those physically dead and/or in the grave..... then Jesus was very busy for three days because he managed to preach the gospel to everyone therein. That is a lot more people than he spoke to while physically alive on the earth during the three years of his ministry. Maybe, just maybe, that bunch of folks who qualified as the imprisoned and dead were just the elect. I am inclined not to say so, but that is a reasonable possibility. Either way, those are two passages that could be used to answer the question, "what happened during those 3 days he was 'gone'?"

I might also digress into an examination of "gone," because Jesus is always everywhere. Just because his physical body of flesh and blood was sitting in a tomb, Jesus' presence is not limited to his physical body.

Quote that sentence you say is non-sensical exactly as written, but do so in context.

Aside from observing that statement is also non-sensical, I believe I have already clarified the earlier matter.


More specific and germane to the op and the specific question of what he was doing while dead for three days,

• Jesus' existence is different from that of the human sinner.
• Jesus' life lived on earth was different from that of the human sinner.
• Jesus' death is different from that of the human sinner.
• There are two purposes served in his life, death, and resurrection.
• For the elect, physical death is merely one inevitable waypoint along the process of God's purpose making incorruptible and immortal people in His image. For the non-elect that death is merely a waypoint onto greater destruction.
• Having a correct definition of hell matters and most of psa is built on the endless torture model of hell (which may not be correct). For example, Jesus was not under the authority of some lesser god or demon while he was physically dead.
• Anything said about what Jesus was doing while physically dead in the grave is necessarily speculative, but some speculations are more scripturally informed and more rationally viable than others.
• The grave is not infinite. Neither is death. Death and the grave are also not eternal (although death might be considered everlasting).
• Jesus' life is at least as important salvifically as his death, but I consider that division a false dichotomy for one does not salvifically exist apart from the other anymore that either exists apart from his resurrection.
• Christ did not suffer infinitely, but suffering, nor sin, nor the punishment thereof, are infinite. Punishment may be everlasting, but not infinite.
• Scripture tells us he was not abandoned to hades, nor did his body see decay. Those are two big differences. We know Jesus body was transformed but was it transformed to a new and different state, or back to a previously existing state with wounds to the hands, feet, and side added?
• As to Christ's suffering being temporal, I am inclined to say it is because the reality of Christ's abuse means he was not recognizable as a human. I can expand on that more but for the sake of space, I personally doubt God left His Son completely disfigured.

I'm sure I left a few points out of that list but those are the points I have covered. They all have relevance to psa.

But, I have no recourse but to think that Christ died precisely the death that all the redeemed would have died.

I tend to agree but a correct understanding of that death must be understood in order for that to have meaning and there are limits to the comparison because Jesus is not a sinner. The redeemed are. Jesus lived a life, died, and was resurrected. He was also judged, but being Jesus, he was not condemned. Neither was he raised to eternal life. He already possessed eternal life. It wasn't "precisely" same death. Baking soda and baking powder are not equivalent substitutions.

 

[Josheb]

Jesus is Lord - He can preach to everyone in Sheol for the three earth days, all of them preached to at the same time and none of them needing to use the restroom or eat or rest...

Then back to earth to get everything situated and ready for the gift of the Holy Spirit, then they have the triumphal entry into heaven and start their millennium, while we build the church with the help of the Holy Spirit.

Yes?

Yep.

How does that apply to psa?

 

[Hazelelponi]

Yep.

How does that apply to psa?

That I haven't a clue...

 

[makesends]

I mean that his Passion was his Hell...

Short lived, but as Eternal as he is; because of who he is. God would measure Christ's Eternality and Hell's Eternality; and come up with the same Measurement. But as we measure things, it lasted just the Easter season...

To God, a thousand years is as a day. To God, one Passion is as an Eternity in Hell...

Ok. I tend toward the 'in kind' type of punishment, not quantity/quality, but of the same sort. But who knows—what he went through may be more definitive of what we would have gone through than vice-versa. Good thoughts!

 

[ReverendRV]

Ok. I tend toward the 'in kind' type of punishment, not quantity/quality, but of the same sort. But who knows—what he went through may be more definitive of what we would have gone through than vice-versa. Good thoughts!

It was obviously different; but I'm sure everyone will agree it was efficient and sufficient. Maybe it's the wrong direction; it happened...

Most discussions try to rid us of PSA...

 

[Josheb]

But who knows—what he went through may be more definitive of what we would have gone through than vice-versa. Good thoughts!

Most people do not get beaten beyond recognition before dying.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Most people do not get beaten beyond recognition before dying.

Probably more common than you realize. Just not common for God.

 

[Josheb]

Probably more common than you realize.

More common that mental health professional who specialized in the treatment of trauma realizes?

Just not common for God.

"Common" is not "majority." Seven people on the planet. Do you think 3.51 billion of them are beaten so badly they cannot be recognized as human before they die?