What Calvinists Get WRONG About Atonement w/ Dr. Scott Hahn

Рет қаралды 61,568

Күн бұрын

Full Episode: • The Holiness of God, P...
Penal Substitution is the protestant idea that Jesus was punished by God the Father instead of sinful mankind. This goes against Church teaching and Dr. Hahn explains why.
Hallow: hallow.com/matt
Exodus 90: exodus90.com/matt
Add Me on Parler: parler.com/mat...
---
📚 My new book!: amzn.to/3FXQDuj
🔴 LINKS
Join Us on Locals (before we get banned on YT): mattfradd.loca...
Website: pintswithaquin...
Merch: teespring.com/stores/matt-fradd
FREE 21 Day Detox From Porn Course: www.strive21.com/
🔴 SOCIAL
Facebook: / mattfradd
Twitter: / mattfradd
Instagram: / mattfradd
Rumble: rumble.com/c/p...
We get a small kick back from affiliate links.

Пікірлер: 630

@Darth_Vader258 7 ай бұрын

The souls in Hell are NOT the souls that God REJECTED. But the souls in Hell are the ones who REJECTED God.

@somexp12 5 ай бұрын

The souls in Hell are the souls that God created and chose as instruments of his desire for justice. He accepted them. He just accepted them for a different purpose. Romans 9 and all. Vessels of wrath prepared for destruction.

@Darth_Vader258 5 ай бұрын

@@somexp12 God predestined no one to Damnation.

@drummera7418 3 ай бұрын

@@somexp12 excuse me? God created people predestinated for suffering, pain, punishment, condenation and eternal fire in hell only with the purpose to fulfill his desire for justice? Are you hearing the words coming out of your mouth? Do you indeed believe in that God? Tell me you're kidding, please!

@fourthplateau944 2 ай бұрын

@drummera7418 Well thank GOD you made the right decision! I guess you're just smarter than all of those people in Hell. Good for you!

@zeektm1762 Ай бұрын

@@drummera7418Was Romans 9 wrong?

@ChildofGod98765 Жыл бұрын

I love you Jesus! Without you we would never know the fulness of God’s love. Jesus you are the key to the universe for “all things have been created through you” So I’m waiting on you Jesus. You give me strength. As a single mother things aren’t isn’t easy on me. I’m overwhelmed at times because both of my children are autistic. I’m desperately struggling trying to support them and myself because like so many others. I lost my job as a social worker at Forsyth hospital because I declined the vaccine. I declined because of my pre existing health condition lupus and heart disease. I was denied my medical/religious exemption. I wish I could go back to the hospital but the mandate is still in place for hospitals that participate in Medicare and Medicaid. I’m waitressing and I’m so thankful to be working again, but I’m not making nearly enough to make ends meet. But God continues to help me. I get harassed and called names for simply asking for prayers, but prayers are all we need to get by, and when you’re a real christian people will always crucify you. Thankfully, God gives me strength to keep going. Even as I face homelessness almost every month with two children. I have faith God will provide. He HAS THIS FAR. Please pray for me and my children.

@PastorCleveland Жыл бұрын

Notice there is a complete lack of scripture in Scott Hahn’s reply. Here is some scripture concerning the atonement to chew on. “Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed…. ‭‭ “Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him; he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for guilt.” (Isaiah 53:4-5, 10) “For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” ‭‭2 Corinthians‬ ‭5‬:‭21. (Notice Scott mentioned this verse and Isaiah 53, but did not explain them. He just said they seem to show penal substitution… that’s because they do) “He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.” ‭‭1 John‬ ‭2‬:‭2‬ ‭(propitiation - hilasmos in Greek - means an atoning sacrifice, or appeasing offering. It’s a direct reference back to the Old Testament atoning sacrifices. That is what Jesus was. The reason the temple sacrifices have been put to an end is because Jesus is the final sacrifice for our sins. He has finally once and for all appeased Gods wrath.) “And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”” ‭‭Mark‬ ‭15‬:‭34‬ “And he said, “Abba, Father, all things are possible for you. Remove this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will.”” ‭‭Mark‬ ‭14‬:‭36‬ What is the CUP that Jesus is dreading? See.. Jeremiah 25:15-16, Lamentations 4:21, Habakkuk 2:16

@leonardu6094 Жыл бұрын

Thanks for the response.

@bobtaylor170 8 ай бұрын

Amen, Brother John!!!! These foolish men are unwitting servants of the Devil. I can't see it any other way. The Devil LOVES to hide behind an appearance of benevolence.

@bobtaylor170 8 ай бұрын

The word salad Hahn is tossing somehow never gets around to explaining how one can be made righteous before God. How, precisely, is this not apostasy?

@kazager11 7 ай бұрын

this was the 1st explanation of RCC atonement theory I've heard. I've looked into the "process" & "rules" but not the "how". I've never been more convinced that the Roman faith is far from Christianity. How do catholics (in the universal way, not the Roman way) accept that Roman Catholics are saved? This is a crazy explanation. For Matt there to say it's reasonable? If this is true, can we really love God enough to be saved?

@ryanharrison4554 7 ай бұрын

Thank you! For someone who is so boldly claiming that the protestant view is ridiculous, he sure didn't bother using any scripture to bolster his point.

@andrewphilipbarlow Жыл бұрын

So in Dr. Hahn's view, I still am not sure why Christ had to die? In other words, if he didn't take the judgment of God that we deserved (i.e. death for our sins as the just judgment of God) but rather only paid the debt we owed (to love God with all of our heart), then why did he have to die at all? Couldn't his life of love have done that? I'm not arguing with Dr. Hahn, but sincerely just trying to understand what he is saying. Thanks!

@purplelegendxd6024 Жыл бұрын

I read the book he recommended and put simply Christ didn’t have to die or undergo any suffering at all for that matter in order to make satisfaction but he does it out of love.

@leonardu6094 Жыл бұрын

@@purplelegendxd6024 That doesn't make any sense at all. If he didn't have to die at all, then why did he? If it wasn't as a substitution for us?

@simonskinner1450 Жыл бұрын

@@leonardu6094It was never a substitution, he died FOR us not instead of us, and on the Cross Jesus took power over death. Atonement is part of baptism, it is the promise of pardon of past sins for those who are sanctified in his covenant, based on our promise not to sin. He is the Judge of those baptised. I have a Ytube video series 'Myths in so-called Christianity' and my latest video #29 is about atonement.

@leonardu6094 Жыл бұрын

@@simonskinner1450 Isaiah 53:5 _But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed_ If someone is crushed for *YOUR* iniquities, i think it's clear he took your punishment.

@simonskinner1450 Жыл бұрын

@@leonardu6094 After the Cross nothing changed directly for us, Jesus was raised for purpose of propitiation as high priest, indirectly able to atone for our past sins. The high priest can reconcile us with God, Jesus took power over death when raised, and sin is judicial condemnation, meaning Jesus can forgive past sins so that those who declare themselves dead to sin can enter the church of God. My latest Ytube video #29 shows atonement in Romans 5:1-11, entering the church gives access to grace. Now what everyone misses in Isaiah 53 is the outcome of his death for us, which is "by his knowledge zealous shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquitues". He shall bear only the iniquities of many not everyone, because he will be asked by God the Father only to bear the iniquities of those he baptises for their profession of faith, and only those he knows shall he make intercession for. All this is covered in my Ytube video series 'Myths in so-called Christianity', I hope you check it out.

@Declared-righteous 6 ай бұрын

Jesus Christ lived a perfect life and kept all of the laws of God that you and I break and have broken. Including loving God perfectly, which is something no one can do. This makes Him the perfect spotless Lamb. He also died a sin-bearing substitutionary death on the cross. Which makes Him the perfect spotless Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. Jesus has done what we cannot do and He did it as a man. The perfect man…..The second Adam. Unlike the first Adam who sinned, Jesus did not sin. Unlike the Old Testament sacrifices which could not take away sin, His perfect life and His sacrificial death does take away sin for those who place their faith in Him alone. Bring an empty hand and trust Christ. This is the gospel. 2 Corinthians 5:20-21 “We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. 21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God”.

@nathanalex6880 Жыл бұрын

Had all of these thoughts going through my Lutheran confirmation classes and talking to Reformed tradition pastors. Beyond joyful that there is something beyond PSA and to be Catholic

@sammilandi8799 Жыл бұрын

Had 14 years of Lutheran schooling. First time I’m hearing this and it is so enlightening. So happy to be in RCIA currently and can’t wait to join the Church this Easter!

@florida8953 Жыл бұрын

That’s too bad

@InhabitantOfOddworld Жыл бұрын

@@florida8953 You are, yes

@gabrielbridges9709 Жыл бұрын

How do you possibly translate these verses without penal substitutionary atonement “Surely our griefs He Himself bore, And our sorrows He carried; Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, Smitten of God, and afflicted. But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, And by His scourging we are healed.” ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭53‬:‭4‬-‭5‬ ‭ “But the Lord was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief; If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of the Lord will prosper in His hand. As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see it and be satisfied; By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will justify the many, As He will bear their iniquities. Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great, And He will divide the booty with the strong; Because He poured out Himself to death, And was numbered with the transgressors; Yet He Himself bore the sin of many, And interceded for the transgressors.” ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭53‬:‭10‬-‭12‬

@Jmurtagh1 7 ай бұрын

I’ll admit I don’t fully understand vicarious satisfaction as described by Dr Hahn, but it sounds like it fails to explain why Christs death was required, whereas penal substitution describes it as the perfect being slain as an infinite sacrifice that covers all sins just as OT sacrifices did. An offering is required for all sins, and a perfect sacrifice is the only thing that can do this once and for all. Also seems like a strawman to say that it’s Trinitary schizophrenia, because the trinity is united in understanding of the purpose of the incarnation - it’s not the father coercing the son into becoming the embodiment of evil, it’s the son willingly bearing the sin of the world. Would love to hear clarification if anyone can provide it

@OneHighwayWalker 5 күн бұрын

As an old believer who's primarily just read the Bible repeatedly over many decades, it seems to me that people just want to argue over matters instead of focusing on walking the walk. I agree that the OT sacrificial system gives us the example of what was needed, and no one took the Savior's life; He willingly gave it. He's God, and thus, God did what was necessary to redeem His creation. Do we believe Him, accept it, and live a life of thankfulness and obedience, or do we argue about how it all works when we don't really understand an infinite, eternal, all-powerful, all-knowing Creator? Shalom!

@peacengrease3901 Жыл бұрын

As an Anglican this really resonates with me.

@Bond_Servant 10 ай бұрын

Just believe the scriptures, Catholics are wrong, Protestant Calvinist, there all false, the calling of grace comes to all man and we repent and be baptised for the forgiveness of sins and we receive the Holy Spirit Then we must obey the Lord Jesus to the very end because Christ blood only covers us if we are walking in the light NOT SINNING! “But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the BLOOD of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.” ‭‭I John‬ ‭1‬:‭7‬ ‭ “eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness-indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.” ‭‭Romans‬ ‭2‬:‭7‬-‭10‬ ‭ “Him we preach, warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus.” ‭‭Colossians‬ ‭1‬:‭28‬ ‭ “Therefore, beloved, looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and blameless;” ‭‭II Peter‬ ‭3‬:‭14‬ ‭ “Love has been perfected among us in this: that we may have boldness in the day of judgment; because as He is, so are we in this world.” ‭‭I John‬ ‭4‬:‭17‬ ‭ “For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries. Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” says the Lord. And again, “The Lord will judge His people.” It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” ‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭10‬:‭26‬-‭31‬ ‭ “Brethren, if anyone among you wanders from the truth, and someone turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins.” ‭‭James‬ ‭5‬:‭19‬-‭20‬ ‭ “For the time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God? Now “If the righteous one is scarcely saved, Where will the ungodly and the sinner appear?” Therefore let those who suffer according to the will of God commit their souls to Him in doing good, as to a faithful Creator.” ‭‭I Peter‬ ‭4‬:‭17‬-‭19‬ ‭ “Therefore, since Christ suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves also with the same mind, for he who has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin,” ‭‭I Peter‬ ‭4‬:‭1‬ ‭

@johnalexis8284 3 ай бұрын

are you born again?

@peacengrease3901 3 ай бұрын

@@johnalexis8284 yes

@collin501 Жыл бұрын

At the end of the video he re-emphasizes the point of penal substitution promoting the idea of God punishing the innocent and releasing the guilty. I think he misses the point of God the Father being the giving one in penal substitution, demonstrating His great love for us. I think there is much more to the atonement than the legal aspect, but to me, the video made a caricature of penal substitution, at least in respect of omitting the Father's love in it.

@Iffmeister Жыл бұрын

The thing is most articulations of PSA are exactly what he described.

@collin501 Жыл бұрын

@UltraX34 i question that because so many people I have known and talked to haven't thought about it like that.

@sebastianfonseca1788 5 ай бұрын

Completely agree with you @colin501 - I see no division here in the way this person intends to create

@Zeero3846 Жыл бұрын

Penal substitution never sat well with me, but at least now I can articulate why a little better. It sounds like God winning the salvation of man by a technicality, and that event therefore set a new legal precedent in which the elect are forever saved. It characterizes wrath as that which satisfies the debt of sin. On the other hand, I appreciate that, contrary to what Catholicism's reputation for penance suggests, it doesn't say that the sin is satisfied by the enactment of a justified wrath, but that it is overcome by an act of love that endures and survives sin's ultimate end. Consequently, Catholics, in following their Lord, do penance as an act of love rather than as a fulfillment of a sense of justice. Such acts prior to Christ's death would have been in vain, but as Christ bears the burden of sin, these acts reflect His love in our person at the final judgement, and we have a well-founded hope that His love overcomes our sins just He did in His Resurrection.

@thomascramer1954 Жыл бұрын

YES... If you want to see God's wrath see where God said, "I repenteth for every having made man." Genesis 6:7

@Bond_Servant 10 ай бұрын

@edel5780 8 ай бұрын

4:10 - "Its love that turns the suffering into sacrifice, it's love that turns the pain into Passion" - that one walloped me hard. Love transforms all things! God is love - praise God!

@AaronDAntoni Жыл бұрын

Thank you! I could not continue with Calvinist or Protestant over all after I started reading scripture. Much of my past was a mere identity. Being able to see Jesus and the Blessed Virgin Mary has shown my that I have a soul. I am not JUST my identity. It was Christ’s love that I felt while being pulled towards him, not guilt. Jesus didn’t command us you make of neighbors feel guilty he told us to lay our lives down out of love. The kind of love that he showed us. I may not be perfect doctrinally but thank you Dr Hahn for explaining it better.

@hirakisk Жыл бұрын

Most Protestants don't agree with Calvinism either. It is a very small group although they seem to be the loudest.

@laurasmith4498 Жыл бұрын

Where are you seeing devotion to Mary in scripture? The only references to Mary in the New Testament are her role as the mother of Christ. The Apostles don’t mention her in their instructions to the church.

@andreeattieh2963 Жыл бұрын

@@laurasmith4498not everything has to be in scripture to be true

@Scott48-w9i Жыл бұрын

@@laurasmith4498 Mary is the ark in heaven so she has a high status

@laurasmith4498 Жыл бұрын

@@Scott48-w9i the idea that Mary is the new Ark or new Eve is completely based on very obscure and shady typology and doesn’t work theologically.

@jdsmith2k7 Жыл бұрын

I'm a former Reformed Presbyterian in the process of examining Lutheranism, Orthodoxy and Catholicism, and PSA has been something I've been wrestling with for some time now. This was very timely. Have even more to think about now!

@SneakyEmu Жыл бұрын

I'm currently reformed Presbyterian. I just don't see the issue here, I don't see why this explanation needs to exclude Substitutionary attornment.

@jdsmith2k7 Жыл бұрын

@@SneakyEmu I'm all for substitutionary atonement, it's absolutely biblical and necessary. The issue Catholics and Orthodox take is with Penal Substitutionary Atonement. Which teaches that the Father poured out His wrath on the Son. That Christ died as our substitute, taking on suffering,death and the curse of the law, in our place, isn't debated.

@jdsmith2k7 Жыл бұрын

@@SneakyEmu I've definitely found church Fathers who speak of the atonement as Christ being punished in our place. Take John Chrysostom for example, who said: "It was like an innocent man's undertaking to die for another sentenced to death, and so rescuing him from punishment." -John Chrysostom What I'm seeing is that Orthodox focus too much on Christus Victor and, due to their dislike of anything western, they rarely ever talk about substitutionary atonement. Reformed go too far with Penal substitutionary atonement and very little emphasis on Christus Victor and reject the Harrowing of Hades. Lutherans generally strike a good balance of both Substitutionary Atonement and Christus Victor. Which is one reason why I'm leaning that route.

@SneakyEmu Жыл бұрын

@@jdsmith2k7 what is the problem with the idea that God poured out his wrath on his son?

@sentjojo Жыл бұрын

@@SneakyEmu If you have two sons, one misbehaves so you beat his brother. Does that sound like a loving father? Christ did not suffer the wrath of God in his crucifixion, that would not be love.

@MilitantfortheImmaculata Жыл бұрын

Praise be to Jesus Christ for Dr. Hahn’s explanation.

@carsonhornsby5177 6 ай бұрын

I’m a former Calvinist that is being confirmed this Sunday- I would very much like to understand this distinction, but it really sounds like he’s saying the same thing twice but with different words.

@sebastianfonseca1788 5 ай бұрын

Exactly my thoughts. What’s the controversy here? I see the creation of a division where there is none really. Sorry, for now I’ll just stick with confessional protestantism…

@thundersmite2162 5 ай бұрын

Which part sounds the same? Pretty vague comment.

@david-001 Ай бұрын

How's your new catholic life been? I'm also a former calvinist thinking about converting... pray for me!

@PInk77W1 Жыл бұрын

“The problem with Calvin is he can’t admit how much God loves us.” St Robert Bellarmine

@hettinga359 Жыл бұрын

Weird quote. How was his view of God’s love inadequate?

@sentjojo Жыл бұрын

@@hettinga359 denial of our free will, the idea that God would create people predetermined to damnation

@hettinga359 Жыл бұрын

@@sentjojo not sure how you have an omnipotent Creator who is outside of time and at the same time have creatures that are free in an absolute sense. If God is the boss how could things not be predetermined? As far as Calvin’s view of God’s love…”Jesus Christ reaches out his arms to call and allure all men both great and small, and to win them to Him.” Calvin, Sermon #28, Deut. 4.36-38

@doctor1alex Жыл бұрын

Reading Calvin on adoption makes it evident that Calvin had a higher view of God's love than the vast majority of professing Christians, especially those of Rome.

@sentjojo Жыл бұрын

@@hettinga359 "not sure how" exactly because you are not the omnipotent one. You don't have to understand every aspect of God. In fact you can't. God is not limited in what he can and can't do just because we think there's a logical limitation on him. Free will is a revealed truth from God, to deny it is to make a liar of scripture.

@markiangooley Жыл бұрын

I’m Catholic. I sing in church choirs. I complain about songs borrowed from Protestant hymnody that are about Jesus suffering the wrath of his sadistic bloodthirsty Father. The Catholic music director doesn’t see anything wrong with them. My fellow choristers don’t see anything wrong with them. I suspect the priest won’t either. Usually I just sing the blasted things anyway, treating them as gross oversimplifications of the truth, but maybe I shouldn’t.

@timboslice980 Жыл бұрын

Yeah I love contemporary Christian but certain songs sound like Jesus is their girlfriend or some protestant theology that makes me wince but as long as you understand that they don't have the fullness of truth they are trying hard to worship the lord. As far as singing in church that's on another level. I would just say a prayer and ask the lord to grant forgiveness

@zackploszay1501 Жыл бұрын

Try to get your church to switch to the missalette called "the source and summit". The music director at our church did a lot of research to find one without protestant hymns mixed in...

@calvinholt5630 Жыл бұрын

That’s the missal we use at my parish, it’s great

@dandeliontea7 10 ай бұрын

I'm Protestant and the PSA-heavy hymns almost make me sick. Its sad because usually the other surrounding lyrics and accompaniment is excellent.

@Bond_Servant 10 ай бұрын

@KH-vp4ni Жыл бұрын

Wouldn't it be both? According to our Jewish roots, the sacrifice was for our atonement.

@Jesusgirl00 Жыл бұрын

When I first came to Christ sincerely, I didn't realize I was learning from Calvinism. I was just doing what I knew to do at the time. to watch sermons and try to learn. I was ignorant and didn't know better. I actually didn't know anything about it. After a few weeks I realized it was a denomination. It hurt me and and a close family member. I can't completely blame the denomination , I really have to blame my self because I didn't realize how different protestant views could be , so that was my fault. Looking back , I see that my heart was not in a place of peace at all. I can't say every Calvinist feels the way I did, but that was my experience. Even my approach about Jesus lacked love. It was a lesson for me that I was able to learn from. Calvinism is just something I really don't align with. I love Calvinists, their my neighbor, but the Calvinistic view just doesn't sit right with me.

@PaDutchRunner Жыл бұрын

Do you believe that everyone, universally, will be saved?

@Bond_Servant 10 ай бұрын

@countryboyred 9 ай бұрын

@@PaDutchRunnerrejecting Calvinism doesn’t mean you embrace universalism

@PaDutchRunner 9 ай бұрын

@@countryboyred It depends on “why” you are rejecting Calvinism. Are you rejecting it so that you can embrace unbiblical doctrines regarding God, man and salvation?

@countryboyred 9 ай бұрын

@@PaDutchRunner why are you following man that lived in the 1500s to tell you about scripture? I thought Protestants hated “man made traditions”? Furthermore, who told you Calvinism was biblical?

@르세라핌김가람 4 ай бұрын

Calvinism is heresy.

@alyu1129 Жыл бұрын

I didn't understand. I need more explanation.

@lesliebee8918 Жыл бұрын

Yes! Our God is so beautiful. Life giving love poured out.

@NomosCharis Жыл бұрын

I don’t see why both can’t be true

@ozoz2931 Жыл бұрын

I now believe as a Catholic, former Protestant, that we (Sinners) can't worship God. We come alongside JESUS worshiping and loving the father , offering himself completely. It is through and with HIM we worship God, offering ourselves with him. The Holy Mass, Christ really and Truly Present, The Lamb that takes away the sin of the world.

@doctor1alex Жыл бұрын

Christ's sacrifice was "once for all" time. That's the word of God - Hebrews chapter 10. Why reject that and say you need the sacrifice of the Mass again and again? - see Hebrews chapter 10. The reformed Protestant understanding of the Lord's Supper ("Eucharist") is Christ present with His people. Not carnally, but spiritually, giving life, as He Himself declares in John 6. Why would you turn to Rome? I can see only three options - It's either: 1. plain ignorance - deliberate or misunderstood, 2. wilful love of idolatry 3. cowardice I hope in your case it is the ignorance of misunderstanding, and in which case I plead with you to seek from the authority of the word of God how He would have us to worship Him in Spirit and truth (John 4), and follow the Lamb accordingly.

@silveriorebelo2920 Жыл бұрын

@@doctor1alex poor you, subverting the catholic teaching - the Church teaches that the SACRIFICE OF THE CROSS becomes present and is offered by the whole community of the believers in the Eucharist, meaning that we receive the grace of being avble to unite ourselves with Christ in his sacrificial act - however, you, protestants, thinking you venerate God by lying and slandering, pretend that catholics clam to offer a new sacrifice each time the Mass is celebrated - that is just the opposite of the doctrine of the faith... notice that it is precisely because the sacrifice of the cross was accomplished once and for all that it is offered to the Church so that believers can present it to God as the reason for forgiveness and grace throughout time...

@lawrence1318 10 ай бұрын

@@silveriorebelo2920 RCs teach that you come to Christ by coming to the church. But the truth is you come to the church by coming to Christ.

@MariaGarcia-el6ph 7 ай бұрын

@@lawrence1318 The Church is the body of Christ. You cannot separate the body from the head. This is clearly stated in scripture. “The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ” - read 1 Corinthians 12: 12-26 - You cannot have one without the other.

@lawrence1318 7 ай бұрын

@@MariaGarcia-el6ph The church is only the church if its members are born again. The church isn't the church before it is the church. So your idea is circular and cultish.

@neetard7360 Жыл бұрын

I like the analogy of the pained creator wishing desperately to fix their creation over a legal analogy It's less about anger & replacement of the broken & more love for which is broken & a desire to fix it, no matter the cost

@annakimborahpa Жыл бұрын

1. As the prisoner Henry 'Papillon' Charriere was delivered from the penal colony of French Guiana, so was Scott Hahn delivered from the zero sum penal substitution of Christ's sacrificial death on the cross as an equal exchange for the sins of men, based upon the doctrine of justification by grace through faith alone. 2. Charriere discovered a new life of freedom for himself in South America after his release from captivity. 3. Scott Hahn discovered that because it originated in a Person who was both divine and human, Christ's death on the cross was of infinite value, infinitely greater than the finite number of mankind's sins, and that it produced a superabundance of grace involving a justification by grace, faith and agape (divine love of God and neighbor), which was intended by God as a reflection of and a participation in the interior relations of the Holy Trinity. 4. "So faith, hope, love (agape) remain, these three; but the greatest of these is love." [1 Corinthians 13:13]

@scottforesman7968 Жыл бұрын

“In this he shows that Christ, being apart from all sin, will receive the sins of men on himself. And therefore he will suffer the penalty of sinners, and will be pained on their behalf; and not on his own” (Proof of the Gospel, 3.2). Eusebius of Caesarea "In his mercy he took upon himself our sins; he himself gave up his own Son as a ransom for us, the holy one for the lawless, the guiltless for the guilty, the just for the unjust, the incorruptible for the corruptible, the immortal for the mortal. For what else but his righteousness could have covered our sins? In whom was it possible for us, the lawless and ungodly, to be justified, except in the Son of God alone? O the sweet exchange, O the incomprehensible work of God, O the unexpected blessings, that the sinfulness of many should be hidden in one righteous person, while the righteousness of one should justify many sinners!" Epistle to Diognetus, 9.2-5 many more early fathers could be cited.

@foodforthought8308 Жыл бұрын

Yes! So much of this is a false debate

@richarddunn9286 Жыл бұрын

I've heard this argument against Christianity so many times. Protestant theology has tainted the Christian name, especially in America, and it is the saddest thing to see people abandon Christ because of a poor representation.

@GhostBearCommander 9 ай бұрын

Not all Protestants are Calvinists.

@Dilley_G45 8 ай бұрын

Asked about Calvinism / Reformed Theology and that guy comes straight out with "Luther". So the whole explanation is misrepresenting. Luther is not Calvin. Even on this they differ

@tonystark2.088 7 ай бұрын

Just like your Mariolatry.

@cherryswirlchale9511 7 ай бұрын

@@Dilley_G45That's because Luther and Calvin both are the author's of PSA. That a systematic system of atonement from the 16th century would dominate protestantism is so sad. I am very happy to see that Christus Victor and the Recapitulation theory are slowly becoming more prominent within protestantism.

@Dilley_G45 7 ай бұрын

@@Anonymousduck161 calvinists have limited atonement. Luther did not teach that.

@OEMPlus 9 ай бұрын

"i preached this until i became a father and realized that doesn't work" ... that is an emotional response not a logical one. *morpheus meme* what if i told you vicarious satisfaction... was achieved through penal substitution atonement?

@dawsonmurray4188 Жыл бұрын

“Who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of Yahweh been revealed? For He grew up before Him like a tender shoot, And like a root out of parched ground; He has no stately form or majesty That we should look upon Him, Nor appearance that we should desire Him. He was despised and forsaken of men, A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; And like one from whom men hide their face He was despised, and we did not esteem Him. ¶Surely our griefs He Himself bore, And our sorrows He carried; Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, Smitten of God, and afflicted. But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; The chastening for our peace fell upon Him, And by His wounds we are healed. All of us like sheep have gone astray, Each of us has turned to his own way; But Yahweh has caused the iniquity of us all To fall on Him. ¶He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He did not open His mouth; Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, So He did not open His mouth. By oppression and judgment He was taken away; And as for His generation, who considered That He was cut off out of the land of the living, That for the transgression of my people, striking was due to Him? So His grave was assigned with wicked men, Yet He was with a rich man in His death, Because He had done no violence, Nor was there any deceit in His mouth. ¶But Yahweh was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief; If You would place His soul as a guilt offering, He will see His seed, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of Yahweh will succeed in His hand. As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see it and be satisfied; By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will justify the many, As He will bear their iniquities. Therefore, I will divide for Him a portion with the many, And He will divide the spoil with the strong; Because He poured out His soul to death, And was numbered with the transgressors; Yet He Himself bore the sin of many, And interceded for the transgressors.” ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭53‬:‭1‬-‭12‬ ‭LSB‬‬ bible.com/bible/3345/isa.53.4.LSB

@michaellawlor5625 Жыл бұрын

Luther see God like that. His scrupulously went on overdrive. He see God as abusive father.

@foodforthought8308 Жыл бұрын

I think that's a caricature

@PaDutchRunner Күн бұрын

I’ve listened to this several times, and I fail to grasp the problem with PSA that Dr Hahn is articulating here. The doctrine of PSA as taught by Vos and others is logically sound - to borrow from Scott’s terminology, it “squares the circle.” Progressive revelation makes an obvious effort to prepare us theologically leading up to the incarnation so that we can appreciate fullness of the salvation that Christ wins for us in the gospel - beginning with Gen 3:15, Gen 15:17, the near-sacrifice of Isaac, through the mosaic cult and the scapegoat etc. - clearly we are being taught that the nature of the atonement is PSA.

@samueleastlund6137 7 ай бұрын

Calvin is clear on the point: Inst. 2.16.11 And certainly no abyss can be imagined more dreadful than to feel that you are abandoned and forsaken of God, and not heard when you invoke him, just as if he had conspired your destruction. To such a degree was Christ dejected, that in the depth of his agony he was forced to exclaim, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” The view taken by some, that he here expressed the opinion of others rather than his own conviction, is most improbable; for it is evident that the expression was wrung from the anguish of his inmost soul. We do not, however, insinuate that God was ever hostile to him or angry with him. How could he be angry with the beloved Son, with whom his soul was well pleased? or how could he have appeased the Father by his intercession for others if He were hostile to himself? But this we say, that he bore the weight of the divine anger, that, smitten and afflicted, he experienced all the signs of an angry and avenging God.

@fishynathanfilms Жыл бұрын

I have a friend who told me once "If God killed his own Son, what do you think He's going to do to us?" I knew his thinking was mixed up, but I didn't know how to answer it at the time. I think this helps! Still trying to wrap my mind around it though

@thomascramer1954 Жыл бұрын

Jesus willingly let himself be killed to show the fullness of Love God has for us; There is no big Ledger in the sky, there is only a God of love beyond imagination who is hoping we become as loving as He is, but is willing to let us turn away from Love and permanently turn away from His presence and go to hell.

@mrtee3988 Жыл бұрын

@@thomascramer1954 But how does his loving action apply to us?

@Scott48-w9i Жыл бұрын

@@mrtee3988 it is a payment

@tropicalpines4585 7 күн бұрын

I think this Scripture sums it up pretty well. Acts 2:23 [23] this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.

@nathanoppy Жыл бұрын

Catholic theology is so much more difficult to understand compared to protestant doctrine.

@PastorCleveland Жыл бұрын

Yes. Wonder why that is.

@daMillenialTrucker Жыл бұрын

@@PastorClevelandbecause it was created by men. Ultimate reconciliationism is the one TRUE WAY to spend ones short time on this planet. God loves ALL but God only protects those who accept His son into their life. A life without Jesus is a life living in hell.

@nathanoppy Жыл бұрын

@@daMillenialTruckerwow. I used to be a Protestant Calvinist my man. All of it is unbiblical and false doctrine. Faith alone is not found anywhere in scripture except James chapter 2 look it up. I find it funny how non Catholics always say that we are not saved when the reality is that everything Protestants teach as far as doctrine is literally not in the Bible. Your so lost man. I feel very sad for you. You persecute the true church of Christ and don’t even know it. Your like Saul. I highly doubt with how you just throw out something so fallacious like that, that you know nothing about actual church history, or the history of the Protestant reformation, or the history of mattin Luther and his atrocity’s l. The truth is your version of Christianity is not Christianity at all. You have been greatly deceived to where you don’t even know your deceived and believe that your false version of the gospel is the truth! I can literally answer any objections that you have about the Catholic Church. Especially since you just throw out statements without any facts to back them up. That’s what all Protestants do. Where as I can cite my sources and their all proven by history. I encourage you to look into church history but do it from an unbiased view point. Your world will come crashing down. It’s really stupid for you to just throw out things you have learned from other Protestants that are literally just not true. You guys do it all the time. The reason the doctrines of God are hard to understand is because you have to have the Holy Spirit to be able to understand them. Not saying you don’t. But the doctrines of the Protestant church’s are literally not of God. Your severely misinformed and wrong love you though

@nathanoppy Жыл бұрын

@@PastorClevelandbecause Protestant church is an unbiblical fallacy created by an evil wicked man named Martin Luther. It’s super simple. Just look up the history of the man? That’s your faith hero? Would you like me to tell you the evil things he did and cite my sources? Also faith alone doctrine is unbiblical. Only where’s you find faith and alone is James chapter 2 verse 24 you see a man is saved by WORKS and NOT by faith alone. Take a look into church history and the reformations and the history of the church from an unbiased view point and your results will be shocking

@nathanoppy Жыл бұрын

@@daMillenialTruckerthe fact that you think catholics don’t know Jesus shows how little you actually understand I feel sad for you

@akremer94 Жыл бұрын

"But Yahweh was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief;" "He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." The Father crushed the Son on in our place according to the Scriptures.

@foodforthought8308 Жыл бұрын

Yes, but that isn't the same thing as saying the "Father poured out His wrath on the Son". The nuanced distinction is very important

@dandeliontea7 10 ай бұрын

Now try looking at that passage in tbe Septuagint.

@countryboyred 9 ай бұрын

The masoretic text uses much harsher language than the Greek

@vitaignis5594 7 ай бұрын

It's simply YOUR interpretation and doesn't address the Trinitarian schizophrenia issue

@HunterShawMusic 5 ай бұрын

Not a Catholic, but the LXX renders that passage "And the Lord desired to purify/cleanse him from his wound". When Paul quotes Isaiah in Romans, and when Isaiah 53 is quoted in Matthew they're both from the LXX. The vast majority of OT quotations in the NT are from the Greek, and the early church primarily used the Greek. It's strange to me that we protestants insist on using OT translation that are based on the Masoretic text.

@NihouNi 4 ай бұрын

As a lifelong Anglican I have wrestled with this a lot. I have found it really difficult to fully put together in my head the astonishing kove I am told about plus the massive wrath and desire to kill as atonement. I still don’t know enough to understand how the Bible doesn’t point to substitutionary atonement but thankyou for helping me along my way.

@Christian-ut2sp Жыл бұрын

So we should forget about Isaiah 53:10? “Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him; he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.”

@dansaber4427 Жыл бұрын

That's the Jewish Messiah

@Diallelus Жыл бұрын

@@dansaber4427 Exactly, that’s Jesus Christ, the Jewish Messiah!

@dansaber4427 Жыл бұрын

@@Diallelus yet to come

@Diallelus Жыл бұрын

@@dansaber4427 So you’re not a Christian I take it?

@dansaber4427 Жыл бұрын

@@Diallelus I'm just discussing the literature

@philiphynes5445 10 күн бұрын

If Jesus didn't suffer the punishment for the sins of those who trust in him, does that mean we will have to bear the infinite punishment of God on our sins for eternity ? But how then can the apostle Paul write "we have peace with God" and "there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus" (Romans 5:1 & 8:1) ? The answer is that Jesus is the High Priest who represented his people, who carried their names on his high priestly clothes as he offered himself as the sacrifice for the sins of his people, who suffered the punishment they deserved, and presented that sacrifice before the Father who accepted it, who then raised His Son from the dead, and seated him on the throne until his return in glory. If God's wrath against sin isn't poured out on a substitute, then it is reserved for the day of judgment. But those who turn to Jesus Christ in faith, who truly see what he has accomplished on the cross, can know and rejoice with the apostle Paul and say : "we have peace with God, there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus".

@andrefouche9682 Жыл бұрын

I rejected the Protestant view of penal substitution before I became Catholic because somehow it seemed to destroy the unity within the Trinity.

@countryboyred 9 ай бұрын

Same. Heard it when I was 12 and never believed it

@EmilyKeenerMusic Жыл бұрын

wonderful insightful clip, thank you 🙏🏻 Praise Abba Father.

@Collin_Brooks Жыл бұрын

kzbin.info/www/bejne/raDNaI2posyjrqM

@alepine1986 Ай бұрын

To all watching: vicarious satisfaction is NOT the only theory of atonement found within Catholicism. Christus Victor is a far superior theory IMO and is equally 'Catholic.' The non-violent atonement as promulgated by Rene Girard, Gil Bailie, James Alison, etc. makes more sense than satisfaction-based theories.

@joeykumar5165 Жыл бұрын

Does anybody else think Scott looks like, Padre Pio?

@collin501 Жыл бұрын

Why can't he see any love in penal substitution? Now i don't think the penal view is the complete picture, and parts of the way its formulated may be flawed. But there is definitely a legal aspect straight from scripture, and denying that seems absurd to me, and that's not only Isaiah 53, but the many judgements God deals out through scripture. But I want to point out that Calvin said the Father was never angry with the Son whom He loved for even a moment. Mr. Hahn doesn't give that picture. For me, there is love, there is payment for penalty, there is washing and cleansing, there is defeating the enemy, there is tasting death and the curse on our behalf, there is demonstration of God's love,there is purchase of our lives, and more. You don't need to have atonement theories that narrow our focus when you have atonement facts. Take all facts about the atonement that scripture teaches, and don't omit a single one!

@sketchbook1 Жыл бұрын

Partially true, but not the whole picture- Isaiah 53 is quite forceful in its declaration that atonement happened because Jesus was a sacrifice for sin- and was crushed for our iniquities. I hate Calvinism, but Mr. Hahn’s view chooses to ignore the entire blood atonement sacrificial system in the OT. It’s also a bit straw-manned as far as Mr Hahn’s descriptions of the punishment. Also it ignores the idea of propitiation, and real wrath, which is quite scriptural.

@georgemoncayo8313 8 ай бұрын

Everything that happens in history has been decreed/Predestined before the world was created see Eph 1:11, Proverbs 16:33 and Amos 3:6. And yes even when terrible things happen, I know it's hard for some people to accept but look what happened when David sinned against God and one of Davids punishments was that God told him that he was going to use Davids own son to shame his Father by Absalom Absalom doing something immoral to his Fathers concubines in front of all of Israel, see 2 Samuel 12:11-12 God said "Thus says the Lord, ‘Behold, I will raise up evil against you from your own household; I will even take your wives before your eyes and give them to your companion, and he will lie with your wives in broad daylight. Indeed you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel, and under the sun." Notice how God said "I WILL DO THIS THING."That was fulfilled in 2 Samuel 16:21-22. Jesus did not die for every single person ever and Jesus didn't die to make people savable. He died to save his elect. In John 17:9 Jesus said that he does not pray for the world. The word world is used in different contexts, in that context he's talking about the non elect. In John 3:16 world means that he purchased people from every tribe, tongue and nation Rev 5:9 and for the children of God scattered abroad John 11:52. Some have been "long beforehand marked out for condemnation" Jude 4 and "appointed to doom." 1 Peter 2:8. About Pharaoh God said “For this VERY PURPOSE I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.” So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires." Rom 9:17-18. Jesus said "I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants. Yes, Father, for this way was well-pleasing in Your sight. All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him." Matthew 11:25-27. So, 2 Pet 3:9 the "not willing that any should perish" if you read that letter in context, 2 Pet 1:1 says "To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours." As far as salvation for all men verses, Paul was refuting the false notion of his time that God was only desiring to save just the Jews and 1 Tim 2:2 says to pray "for kings and all who are in authority" because as humans WE DON'T KNOW WHO THE ELECT ARE SO WE PRAY FOR EVERYONE! That's what it means in verse 4 by saying "all men." Amos 3:2 God said "of all the nations of the earth I have only known you." For centuries God passed over the majority of humankind because this verse isn't about knowledge it's about relationship. And it isn't because God foresaw Israel was more righteous then the other nations because sometimes Israel was more sinful then the pagan nations see 2 Kings 21:9. Only those who were predestined to be saved will be see Acts 13:48, Ephesians 1:4-5, Eph 1:11, Romans 9:11-23, John 6:37. 1 Samuel 3:14 God said “Therefore I have sworn to the house of Eli that the iniquity of Eli’s house shall not be atoned for by sacrifice or offering forever.” That's Limited atonement.

@bradbrown2168 Жыл бұрын

Brilliant presentation. My impasse to Catholicism is Papal succession. It rests squarely on Peter’s Confession and the interpretation of Jesus words. I don’t see Peter as a Vicor of Christ. A lot of theology read into the concept without scriptural support. The Rock Jesus was referring to was the actual Rock near Pan’sGrotto. Jesus was declaring war to the unseen powers of darkness. Transfiguration was on Mt Hermon. The place where the Watchers descended Gen 6. That whole area of Bashan was Evil Central. Dr Micheal Heiser Unseen Realm and Reversing Hermon.

@silveriorebelo2920 Жыл бұрын

sorry, but you have much more than that - you have the witness of the first 150 years after Jesus - beginning with the Letter of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians (around the year 90); in it, Clement acted with authority in order disciple the church of Corinth - you must also read Ireneaus in the Adversus haereses, III, 3 (around 170), saying that all the churches must follow the teaching of the church of Rome - you can also read the letter of Ireneaus to the pope Victor in the question of the quatordecimanos - Pope Victor was willing to excommunicate the churches of the province of Asia due to the fact they celebrated Easter according to the Jewish calendar - Ireneaus advised hm not to do that because the matter did not justify such radical measure - you have also Tertulian (210) criticisng the bishop of Rome because he pretends to be the master of all the churches, etc etc

@countryboyred 9 ай бұрын

The Rock IS Jesus Christ

@bradbrown2168 2 ай бұрын

RC was the first to schism from the Universal Church.

@hallboy5 6 ай бұрын

PSA isn't counter to God's love. It's how God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) agreed to love us. Nothing schizophrenic about it either, because there really are 3 persons of the Trinity and they truly are 1 being. "For our sake, he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God" (2 Cor 5:21). Was it a show of God's love? Yes, absolutely! "God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us" (Rom 5:8). He loves us BY dying for us. Please, guys- don't set up a false dichotomy. Let's read the Scriptures and glory in the love of God, shown in his sinless life, substitutionary death, and victorious resurrection.

@ZefShala-z2w 20 күн бұрын

Sorry! Great respect for Mr. Kahn and for Matt also, but the explanation is relying more on human logic and not so much on scripture. Not satisfactory for me.

@michaelbanda9993 6 ай бұрын

Couple of things wrong with this video: 1. Penal substitution isn’t just a Calvinist thing and also has been believed early in church history 2. ”Surely He has borne our griefs And carried our sorrows; Yet we esteemed Him stricken, Smitten by God, and afflicted. But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; We have turned, every one, to his own way; And the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all. Yet it PLEASED the Lord to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief. When You make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, And the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in His hand.“ ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭53‬:‭4‬-‭6‬, ‭10‬ ( seems pretty much sums up the argument he made for “ schizophrenic Trinity” and penal substitution) 3. He made the assumption that is has to only be love. Why can’t it be both love and justice ?? 4. He made arguments I’ve heard liberal progressives make on the nature of the atonement. Not tryna to start a war. Just pointing out serious flaws in the video. I have great love and respect for Catholics. God bless.

@camythomas6860 6 ай бұрын

It is because of Justice and Love, there isn't a dichotomy here really. It is at the cross where Justice and Love come together. Where the deepest longing of man's heart is satisfied. He became sin who knew no sin so that we may become the righteousness of God. Do consider this: That divine joy does not obliterate the divine sorrow. In our world, joy and sorrow exclude each other. Here below, joy means the absence of sorrow and sorrow the absence of joy. But such distinctions do not exit in God. Jesus, the Son of God, is the man of sorrows, but also the man of complete joy. We catch a glimpse of this when we realize that in the midst of his greatest suffering Jesus is never seprated from his Father. His union with God is never broken even when he "feels" abandoned by God. The joy of God belongs to his sonship, and this joy of Jesus and his Father is offered to me. " -Henri Nouwen The Return of the Prodigal son. Think especially of the Prodigal son in the pig sty. What made him get up from the pig sty and turn his face towards home? Yes, deprivation made him get back from the pig sty but it is chesed (loving kindness) love of the Father that made him turn his face towards home. The Justice is taken care of on the son, Isaiah 53 explains what a father does out of Justice and Mercy and Love.

@michaelbanda9993 6 ай бұрын

@@camythomas6860 you’re affirming my point ?

@camythomas6860 6 ай бұрын

@@michaelbanda9993 Just replying to your point no. 3 on the comment above. I don't see a dichotomy that Scott is speaking only of God's love and not His justice. It is not an either/or argument, it is a both/and point.

@michaelbanda9993 5 ай бұрын

@patriceagulu8315 Augustine, Aquinas, Hillary of Arles, should I go on ??

@jonathanrocha2275 2 ай бұрын

Romans 8:3-4 (ESV): For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit I didn’t hear any of this in the explanation that was given. Sounds like you’re appealing to emotions

@josephcastaldo4881 4 ай бұрын

In his argument Dr. Hahn claims Isaiah 53 is misunderstood and Paul is problematic.........NO THANK YOU! Colossians 2:8 "See to it that there is no one who takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception in accordance with human tradition, in accordance with the elementary principles of the world, rather than in accordance with Christ."

@johnsonlawrence803 3 ай бұрын

All these atonement theories, which different theologians created in different centuries and still writing and talking, are simply a waste of time. All these are built on the basic false assumption that the image of God in which we were created is lost due to Adam's sin and through procreation, carried forward to all people. Sexual relationship in which we are born is seen as a sinful act. Jesus understood that we can know right and wrong and choose God and his ways in our freedom. That is why the Sermon on the Mount and all its teachings are given. Jesus said children are sinless and belong to God. Moreover, the whole Bible affirms that God has the power to forgive sin, and He is like a loving father waiting for us to repent, turn to God, and choose to live God's way. Whatever imperfections, God is there to forgive. What did Jesus achieve through his death on the cross? The Bible itself offers different answers. So it is a mystery of God, and we cannot claim to know everything. Some of the effective and good way to see is 1. The self-sacrificing love of God revealed on the cross. God's persuasive love calls us to choose God and the path Jesus taught. John 3:16. 2. God's identification with suffering humanity. All the traditional theories are no longer meaningful. They are completely against our common sense.

@julioperez6667 4 ай бұрын

Catholic here former Protestant, not really hearing much of a difference between Penal Substitutionary Atonement vs Vicarious Satisfaction. I don't know about Luther but the Calvinist perspective of law is for the perfection of the individual not just juridical.

@markdavies8381 3 ай бұрын

This is purely using emotive language as if God’s wrath is, to use his words, a blind rage. It is not. His wrath is judicial punishment, it is exercised in the context of the moral universe that God created. God said to Adam, in the day that you eat, you will die. That is the judicial consequence for a broken moral law, not some irate potentate who has lost it. Plus the whole concept of penal substitution is given to us in type through the book of Leviticus of the atoning lamb, of Aaron yearly laying his hands on the creature, confessing Israel’s sins for the transference not of their sin or guilt to the sacrifice that is still theirs but that the sacrifice is the innocent victim who bears the judgement of broken laws. The sin doesn’t become the property of the victim, they are still innocent, the victim has become the bearer of the punishment. It is an acknowledgment by the penitent that he deserves the death but also an acknowledgement that God has provided a substitute. We know after the slaying the creature the blood is taken before the mercy seat to gain God’s absolution for Isreal which of course the book of Hebrews explains the fulfilment of the type through Christ. This has all to do with law, so God can say to the rebellious cohorts who followed Satan that He is just is forgiving the sinners and maintains the moral order of the universe because as Paul tell us that Christ was the lamb slain before the foundation of the world, in that before anything was, even before the angelic order and God’s thoughts toward mankind was that if I create such a being and he falls how do I maintain my justice in the universe and my love towards him, the solution atonement. This was hidden from Satan, it is brought out wonderfully in the Chronicles of Narnia by C S Lewis where the witch thinks she has conquered Aslan when she slew him only to find out the deep magic, which she was ignorant of, that when an innocent victim dies for the guilty time starts working backwards. I do not deny that the cross is also a great revelation of the love of God so for me it is not the typical western philosophical view of argumentation of either/or but I believe it is both/and. The cross is both penal and a manifestation of vicarious love. It bothers me endlessly when we have the inspiration of Scripture telling us the penal aspect of Christ death for then theologians to tell us, well that is not what God meant.

@IsaiahINRI 2 ай бұрын

This is why I cannot stand Calvinism. I have my issues with all the non-Roman Catholic denominations but of all the Trinitarian denominations Calvinism is the worst to me. Every other denomination messes up how we ought to live but Calvinism insults God and turns Him into some sort of pagan god.

@josephdalessandro8898 5 ай бұрын

Nobody can ever love God perfectly in this life. Jesus did it for us. Gods very nature is wrath against the smallest sin. Jesus sweated drops of blood because he knew he was going to suffer eternal wrath of the Father in our place. Gods law is meant to show us we can’t keep it, only Jesus can in our place. I can’t believe Catholics believe this.

@bradbrown2168 8 ай бұрын

Satisfaction theory is not early church theology. Jude 3 should be our guide post understanding what the original hearers understood. Ransom, Christus Victor, Passover lamb (protecting blood from death).

@bradbrown2168 2 ай бұрын

I think Anselm’s time in History reflects the notion needed satisfaction. Like a man who slaps another man and demands satisfaction w a duel. God is bigger than this. As if a human reaction is applied the King of the Universe.

@lawrence1318 10 ай бұрын

Both views are wrong. PSA is wrong because it's illogical and not permitted in any court of law. The view Hahn espouses here is also wrong because it's essentially martyrdom and establishes no bond between the believer and Christ other than a "voluntary humility" which Paul tells us to steer clear of. I am a Calvinist, but both Calvin and the RC idea are wrong.

@Rbl7132 4 ай бұрын

From Calvinism to idolitrous blasphemous Word of God rejecting Catholicism? Sir, get saved.

@jreberanlc 6 ай бұрын

If not penal substitution - what did Jesus mean in Gethsemane, "If possible, take this cup from me". Jesus was about to drink the full cup of God's wrath.

@DavidB091 3 ай бұрын

I suggest Dr. Hahn’s book “The Fourth Cup” for a proper answer to this question

@nathanoppy Жыл бұрын

I’m becoming part of the Catholic Church in April. And this doctrine has been the hardest for me to understand because I had that old Protestant view for the longest time

@mrtee3988 Жыл бұрын

How did you eventually comprehend it?

@ThejaTseikha Жыл бұрын

Same here..still struggling..:(

@Greg-n Жыл бұрын

@@ThejaTseikhaHey, it's actually beautifully simple: God's merciful love is the cause, not the result of that satisfaction fulfilled on the cross. PSA flips it the other way. Pax

@gravity111587 11 ай бұрын

@@mrtee3988 I am struggling to comprehend it. I understand it as a marital covenant more than a judicial substitution... but I am still having a hard time :)

@APP-hm6bf 10 ай бұрын

If you put aside God's attributes and only think of love - you'll get it. Frankly, I don't believe this at all - as a parent, you do hard things for your children out of love for them - God is a God of justice and the 'non PSA ' side seems to conveniently forget that. I am convinced that people are very comfortable in their sin nature find PSA incorrect.

@cyphus5 Жыл бұрын

Is this really counter to Luther's view? I can understand it to be counter to John Calvin's view, but Luther's.

@CAVEDATA Жыл бұрын

It helps not to think of these things in the context of our low emotional states. Dont imagine. Be still and let The Word enter rather then applying words to concepts.

@davidkintner540 2 ай бұрын

Penal substitution seems to make a lot more sense than vicarious satisfaction. Just from this guys explanation vicarious satisfaction seems very vague and nebulous.

@simonskinner1450 Жыл бұрын

Claptrap. Jesus died to take power over death, atonement is acceptance into the church. I have a Ytube video series 'Myths in so-called Christianity' for the truth.

@gabrielbridges9709 Жыл бұрын

If you can’t say that Jesus died for our sins then you make the cross useless and your still in your sins. Also if Jesus isn’t the fulfillment of the sacrificial lamb then why does he have to come down and die for us? If you take the substitutionary atonement away your are taking the gospel away and making it superficial.

@graybillythekid 10 ай бұрын

He doesnt explain why Jesus was made a curse for us and hung on a tree n why He was tortured instead of just being stabbed n be done with it lol or why Jesus was so scared n overcome with anxiety in the garden n asking the Father to let it pass from Him. If God's wrath against sin wasnt poured out on Christ on the cross then why make Christ a curse being hung on a tree n tortured horribly for no reason..

@mathete9968 25 күн бұрын

I have never heard such apostasy from.the many clear statements of Scripture

@xtusvincit5230 10 ай бұрын

Isn't Penal Substition from St. Anselm's Cur Deus Homo?

@sunnybuckle3979 9 ай бұрын

I think Anselm formulated a substitutionary satisfaction theory of atonement, which Calvin streamlined into a penal substitutionary theory of atonement.

@xtusvincit5230 9 ай бұрын

@@sunnybuckle3979 Anselm's theory was also penal

@sunnybuckle3979 9 ай бұрын

OK, thanks, this is something I'm trying to figure out - ie whether PSA is an original biblical doctrine or developed later and injected into Christian ideology.

@mmbtalk Жыл бұрын

You cannot discuss redemption without referring to the book of Leviticus, there we clearly see an animal taking the place of an offerer. In Genesis 22, we see a lamb taking Isaac's place. He who knew no sin was made sin 2 Corinthians 5:21 and was judged as thus. Also in John 2:1-2 the word is propitiation instead of expiation, clearly not supporting Prof Hahn's views!

@CATALINAG1 5 ай бұрын

THO CHRIST SAVED US , THERES PEOPLE HERE ON EARTH THAT WILL NOT ACCEPT THIE FACTUAL SACRIFICE OF JESUS FOR OUR SINS . SOME ARE DOWNRIGHT ANGRY AT THOSE WHO TRY TO REACH THEM WITH THIS TRUTH WHEN DO WE LET GO WHAT ONLY GOD CAN GRAFT IN

@chibuezeughanze1121 Жыл бұрын

Same arguments muslims use to deny the cross, that obeying the Law of love deletes the need for blood sacrifice, shame

@johnalexis8284 3 ай бұрын

Mr. Hahn, are you born again? Take your time...

@calebmarquart 7 ай бұрын

Isaiah 53?

@craigsherman4480 Жыл бұрын

I read this book, it was eye opening. Great recommendation Dr. Hahn.

@billyf7 11 ай бұрын

All sounds very rational until you read Isaiah 53. Which says the very thing he is arguing against.

@AlastairLockhart 4 ай бұрын

I recommend viewers read the words of the Hymn Amazing Grace.

@paulvoit5610 4 ай бұрын

You have to ignore ignore that Christ did it all so that you can justify requiring the Mass

@FedericoBautista-n2v Ай бұрын

Nah I’ll stick to Scripture the Just for the unjust.

@Bond_Servant 10 ай бұрын

@uchennanwogu2142 9 ай бұрын

how do you know your interpretations are correct?

@josephtravers777 Жыл бұрын

How did God's image become dunghills covered in snow, Mr. Luther?

@pjelpers Жыл бұрын

Regarding penal substitution, isn't the just punishment for our sins eternal damnation? So then, for penal substitution to be true and result in Christ taking on this punishment in our stead, wouldn't Christ then have to be eternally damned?

@matthewodonnell6495 7 ай бұрын

Christ is of infinite value, so when the infinite, eternal Son of God is killed, it is worth everything

@pjelpers 7 ай бұрын

@matthewodonnell6495 I don't disagree, but I'm saying for someone who holds to penal substitution, wouldn't this be irrelevant? If the point is not that "he paid for our punishment in full" but that he "received our just punishment", then wouldn't that "just punishment" be eternal damnation?

@matthewodonnell6495 7 ай бұрын

@@pjelpers I wouldn’t say it’s irrelevant because it’s about satisfying Gods wrath. So when Gods perfect, innocent Son is crushed for our sin, then if our sin penalty is transferred to Him and His atonement to us than it a mysterious way God is satisfied. I see your point I’ve asked myself that as well, but I think it’s about the value of Christs person. You could say If our sin is an eternal offense than we need an eternally valuable sacrifice.

@lettucelord4695 27 күн бұрын

How does the notion of sinful imputation, as the sin sacrifices of old did. Taking upon the unblemished lamb the sin of Israel?

@lettucelord4695 27 күн бұрын

Hahn doesn't tackle the verses he brings up that are Penal Substitution's proof texts. The bible doesn't pain a simplistic view of the cross. Satisfaction, substitution, victory - are all aspects of the cross. To call one false/inferior simply because it is terrifying is unfortunate.

@bellanegrin3915 Жыл бұрын

Can you explain the "love" that Dr. Hahn was talking about. It is a tough concept, unlike the love that most of us know. It has got to be something so much more than what we commonly understand. Thank you.

@calvinholt5630 Жыл бұрын

Willing the good of the other for the other

@sebastianfonseca1788 5 ай бұрын

Everything Dr Hahn says about vicarous satisfaction according to Aquinas is the same if not extremely similar from what I have learned about Penal Subsitution Atonement in my theology studies of the reformation. I genuinely do not understand what he is on about or what the issue is. I am seeing a division where there is none. In fact, it is the first time I am encountering an opposition or contrasting debate between PSA and VS, as though in conflict with each other - never heard it before in any reformed courses (Lutheranism or otherwise). And to be clear, there are important soterological differences btw Roman Catholicism and Confessional Protestantism - but this isnt one of them…

@scholasticismreformed166 4 ай бұрын

You’re completely right. I won’t say that Hahn is lying here, but he’s seemingly ignorant on the subject.

@jackhohne6163 Жыл бұрын

There is a catholic type of penal substitutionary atonement. Aquinas mentions this in his commentary on Gal.3:13, also Eric Ybarra has a few great articles on this topic.

@Mkvine Жыл бұрын

Great point, if the Catholic view is not nuanced, then it can easily be confused with the Protestant version.

@tjs.5044 Жыл бұрын

If you don't mind, what is the core difference between the Catholic view and the Protestant view of penal substitution?

@Mkvine Жыл бұрын

@@tjs.5044 The main difference is that for some protestants, penal substitution essentially means that Christ was imputed with our sins and counted as guilty before the Father in our place. As a result, the Father punished the Son for all the sins imputed to him. This means that the Father really counted Jesus a murderer and adulterer. Consequently, Christ was punished by paying for our sins through eternal damnation - hell. There are various problems with this. First, it is blasphemous to impute sins to Christ. Christ is perfect and sinless. Second, the legal punishment for sin is not only death but eternal damnation. This means that Christ was condemned to hell/suffered hell on our behalf. The Bible nowhere teaches that and it's blasphemous. Third, it can lend itself towards to heresy of Nestorianism, where it separates Christ into two persons - the divine person did not undergo punishment but the human person did. This last point is not explicitly made, but it can logically lead to it. In contrast, in the Catholic view, Christ as the incarnate God is our representative before the Father. We say that Christ made a vicarious sacrificial offering for our sins and atoned for them on the cross. Here, Christ is offering his unblemished and sinless body as a pleasing sacrifice and gift to the Father on our behalf. The Father, out of his love for the Son, accepts his sacrifice. This sacrifice has infinite merits because Christ is the God-man. And Christ as our eternal mediator achieves reconciliation between God and man. None of this entails Christ being imputed with sin and therefore punished in hell for those sins. So in short, the views can overlap and are similar, with the exception of imputation of sin to Christ and him paying the penalty of sin, which is eternal damnation.

@tjs.5044 Жыл бұрын

@@Mkvine But the aforementioned Catholic scholar, Eric Ybarra, actually argues that our sins are imputed to Christ. What you described is vicarious atonement, not penal substitution.

@Mkvine Жыл бұрын

@@tjs.5044 Yes, we believe in vicarious satisfaction, not penal substitution. I’ve talked to Erick before and I’ve asked him if he could provide an official statement (Council of Trent for example) that says our sins were imputed to Christ. He has not been able to do so. From talking to him, he does not hold to penal substitution in the Protestant sense, but I haven’t gotten further clarification on what exactly he means.

@EnTeaJay 6 ай бұрын

Thank you Dr. Hahn for totally and clearly explaining a problem that has stumped me, a cradle 72 year-old Catholic, for many, many years.

@jowardseph Жыл бұрын

Thanks for answering my question!

@TrevorKing0 22 күн бұрын

Who does he mention at the 8 minute mark??? John who????

@phillipgriffiths9624 4 ай бұрын

Penal substitution is biblical. What we have here is a caricature.

@doctor1alex Жыл бұрын

Had to stop watching after 1 minute 30 since Hahn misrepresents reformed theology. Very disappointing indeed.

@dumbox1899 Жыл бұрын

What's so awesome about this is that through Jesus, our relationship with God is COMPLETELY repaired! And actually so (not just forensically), even from our end as human persons!

@den8863 Жыл бұрын

It is only repaired if you accept it and live it. I am a Christian and a Catholic, and I am not compassionate I rarely give to the poor, I talk behind peoples backs, swear and curse at others regularly. I have started to turn back a little bit again, but I am so far far from where I should be. I am not a model follower of Christ yet I truly believe he is God. I have a good feeling that I will suffer greatly in purgatory or(hopefully not) hell. I am lazy.!please pray for me.

@ryanchristianvasiletiongso2387 Жыл бұрын

I will pray for you Den man. I suffer from the sín of despair often, but do your best to love God and be obedient to him. Remember the graves given in the sacraments and try to clean up your life to prevent you from falling to any and all vices. Aim for heaven, and even if you and I have to suffer in purgatory before hand, then that’s still merciful. All better than the fires of hell.

@matthewodonnell6495 7 ай бұрын

@@den8863The Bible seems to indicate we cannot accept salvation apart from God predestining us, and He will give the Spirit to those who are His. So we must trust in Christs work on the cross, and rely on Him, and pray to strengthen us

@den8863 7 ай бұрын

@@matthewodonnell6495 see Matthew 25, - to the sheep and the goats- “That what you have done to the least if my brothers, you have done to me.”

@jeromevillanueva2207 Жыл бұрын

Penal Substitution is biggest cringe that made me leave evangelical protestantism and could count as heresy.

@marshallballantine-jones3819 Жыл бұрын

If our sins aren't punished, how can God be just?

@jeromevillanueva2207 Жыл бұрын

Theosis and Christus Victor are more reliable models than Penal Substitution. Sure! I believe that Jesus died for us. Our redemption from sin thru Christ is real because GOD LOVES US. But to believe that Jesus died in place of us is something else. I refuse to believe that God The Father is a schizophrenic who demands blood for our sins. "I demand mercy not sacrifice." By the way, our affliction as a result of sin is not God's punishment but rather self-inflicted. If you lived a promiscuous life and get STD, God didn't punish you. You did it to yourself. kzbin.info/www/bejne/nXOWqn6rZ9iLgNE

@InhabitantOfOddworld Жыл бұрын

@@marshallballantine-jones3819 If God is purely about punishment, how can He be loving and merciful? Your sins are forgived It's like you read the Bible, got through the Old Testament, then stopped. Classic protestantism, always judaising

@chico2033 Жыл бұрын

@@InhabitantOfOddworld God is loving and merciful, and just to punish sin, that is why "The Lord laid on Him the iniquity of us all" Isaiah 53:6 and "the punishment that brought us peace was on him." God is loving because God The Father smites his own Son for love of the unrighteous, which the Son willingly takes so that we, the unrighteous may be declared righteous.

@InhabitantOfOddworld Жыл бұрын

@@chico2033 No, God the Father didn't smite the Son The Son was a self-voluntary sacraficial lamb

@soulosxpiotov7280 5 ай бұрын

Wait, does Dr. Hahn believe that Jesus died for our sins, was punished for our sins on our behalf, cried out "My God My God, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?" in that the Father forsook the Son, Christ is our PROPITIATION in that He APPEASED THE FATHER - or does Dr. Hahn does NOT believe this ??????? Does anyone have the courage to answer this question, or are you Roman Catholics a bunch of wimps?

@soulosxpiotov7280 5 ай бұрын

@patriceagulu8315 So, you're disagreeing with Scripture?

@Vico1985. 3 ай бұрын

Read psalm 22. Jesus was singing this psalm on the cross.

@stephenrutherford6039 4 ай бұрын

I think it's worth being clear that there are MANY instances of the Church fathers - whom Catholic tradition would hardly condemn as theologically ludicrous - teaching something that smells suspiciously like PSA long before Calvin. Cyril of Alexandria - Commentary on John, Book XII: "He had undergone, for our sakes, though innocent, the sentence of death. For, in His own Person, He bore the sentence righteously pronounced against sinners by the Law...The Cross, then, that Christ bore, was not for His own deserts, but was the cross that awaited us, and was our due, through our condemnation by the Law…He took upon Himself the Cross that was our due, passing on Himself the condemnation of the Law, that the mouth of all lawlessness might henceforth be stopped, according to the saying of the Psalmist; the Sinless having suffered condemnation for the sin of all...For our sake He paid the penalty for our sins. For though He was One that suffered, yet was He far above any creature, as God, and more precious than the life of all." Athanasius - Letter to Marcellinus - "And Psalm 22…They pierced my hands and my feet- what else can that mean except the cross? And Psalms 88 and 69, again speaking in the Lord’s own person, tell us further that He suffered these things, not for His own sake but for ours. Thou has made Thy wrath to rest upon me, says the one; and the other adds, I paid them things I never took. For He did not die as being Himself liable to death: He suffered for us, and bore in Himself the wrath that was the penalty of our transgression, even as Isaiah says, Himself bore our weaknesses." Augustine - Contra Faustus - "The apostle boldly says of Christ, "He was made a curse for us;" for he could also venture to say, "He died for all." "He died," and "He was cursed," are the same. Death is the effect of the curse; and all sin is cursed, whether it means the action which merits punishment, or the punishment which follows. Christ, though guiltless, took our punishment, that He might cancel our guilt, and do away with our punishment." And, we could go on listing many citations from many fathers, both east and west, that explicitly state something much like PSA - which is where Calvin got it.

@stephenrutherford6039 4 ай бұрын

It's also worth being clear that this high-sounding Catholic view of Christ's vicarious satisfaction espoused in the video is also the framework from which the RCC explicitly condemns those who believe in the doctrine of justification by faith alone through the merits of Christ alone, in order to argue that the satisfaction of Christ merits for us the grace of justification, which justification is NOT simply the remission of sins and the imputation of Christ's righteousness, but is BOTH the forgiveness of sins AND the subsequent formation in hope and charity to be perfected by OUR grace-enabled cooperation with Christ. And, likewise, in RCC theology, the satisfaction of Christ does not negate the need for subsequent satisfactions for sins we commit after the fact of being made partakers of the grace of Christ. Therefore, in Catholic theology, plainly taught in Trent and the catechism of the Catholic church, we need to make satisfactions for our sins through the sacrament of penance/reconciliation - both in order to return to the state of grace/justification in the event we have fallen through serious sin, and also to expiate the temporal punishments merited by our sins committed after receiving grace. Thus, Council of Trent - Chapter 14 - On the Fallen and Their Restoration: "Whence it is to be taught, that the penitence of a Christian man after his fall, is very different from that at his baptism; and that therein are included not only a cessation from sins, and ... a contrite and humble heart, but also the sacramental confession of the same sins...and sacerdotal absolution, and likewise satisfaction by fasts, almsgivings, prayers, and the other pious exercises of a spiritual life; not indeed for the eternal punishment, which is, together with the guilt, remitted, either by the sacrament, or by the desire of the sacrament; but for the temporal punishment, which, as the sacred writings teach, is not always wholly remitted, as is done in baptism, unto those who, ungrateful to the grace of God which they have received, have grieved the Holy Spirit," And the expiation of the remaining temporal punishments for which insufficient satisfaction has been made is, of course, the point of purgatory - wherein the remaining penal and medicinal satisfactions to be made in view of the temporal punishments merited by our sins are to be paid. Thus, Council of Trent - Canon 30 - "If any one shall say, that, after the grace of justification received, unto every penitent sinner the guilt is so remitted, and the penalty of eternal punishment so blotted out, that there remains not any penalty of temporal punishment, to be discharged either in this world, or in the next in purgatory, before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be laid open; let him be anathema."

@stephenrutherford6039 4 ай бұрын

So...not all that satisfactory of a satisfaction.