Questions
Did Jesus take the wrath of God for us?
This statement makes two claims. First, the false premise that God had wrath on us to begin with. This is what penal substitution is built upon. Second, that God gave that wrath to the innocent. In other words, He punished an innocent man so that the guilty could go free. This they say satisfied God’s perfect justice. But it isn’t satisfied by punishing the innocent and letting the guilty go free. That is not the definition of justice.
There was no wrath to take
God did not have wrath on mankind to begin with because of Adam’s trespass. Adam was ignorant when he trespassed. He had not yet eaten of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The trees weren’t a test for Adam and Eve. God didn’t tell them not to eat to see if they would obey Him or not. This is discussed in much more detail in my book God on Trial, coming early 2027.
The sins of the fathers are not passed to the sons
The sins of the fathers are not passed to the sons. That’s because God does not punish the innocent. It’s no different than people today being punished for something their dead ancestors did. God does not hold accountable those who couldn’t help their situation or could have done anything about it and treat them as if they could have. As it is written, “the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the iniquity of the transgressor shall be upon him” (Ezekiel 18:20).
Who God’s wrath is for
Over and over again the Bible says who God’s wrath is aimed at, and that is the wicked. These are those who know the evil they are doing and do it anyways because that is what they love. Not those who are ignorant or unable. God doesn’t expect mankind to be righteous when He knows they can’t be and then get angry at them for it. That’s called bearing false witness. And God is not overly severe or indifferent to the plight of mankind. He knows what we desire and need and He is faithful to provide us the correct information as well as enable us to do the good we desire.
“But Jesus agreed to it”
They will also argue that it isn’t unjust because Jesus willingly gave Himself as our sacrifice. Since He agreed to it then it’s not an injustice. But a willing participant in an injustice doesn’t make the injustice just. Whether Christ was willing or not, God is still punishing the innocent. Would not the willing participant in this case be guilty of interfering with the justice process by attempting to stop justice from being accomplished?
Moses also willingly offered himself as a substitute in place of the Hebrews so they could escape justice. But God refused. Not because Moses wasn’t perfect. He stated why He wouldn’t when He said, “If any one has sinned against me, I will blot them out of my book” (Exodus 32:33). God doesn’t bear false witness and punish the innocent, even when the innocent willingly gives himself as a substitute. One injustice doesn’t make up for another injustice. It only adds to it.
God on Trial: The Oldest Accusation, Settled at the Cross — coming 2027.