GOT (CALVINIST) ANSWERS

If you have ever googled questions about faith or the Bible, you might have noticed that one of the top returns is always gotquestions.org. 

They have an answer for every question, delivered with confidence and conviction.

And the stink of Calvinism.

There should be a warning label. But there isn't. 

Anyway, I looked up their description of penal substitutionary atonement. Their case for PSA is enlightening, for what you don't find.

Their description of PSA begins: "In the simplest possible terms, the biblical doctrine of penal substitution holds that Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross takes the place of the punishment we ought to suffer for our sins. As a result, God’s justice is satisfied, and those who accept Christ can be forgiven and reconciled to God."

Notice they have already gotten you thinking past the sale; PSA is a biblical doctrine!

Yet if you look closely at their two paragraphs of proof texts, you might notice something interesting. I quote at length:

"Penal substitution is clearly taught by the Bible. In fact, much of what God did prior to Jesus’ ministry was to foreshadow this concept and present it as the purpose of the Messiah. In Genesis 3:21, God uses animal skins to cover the naked Adam and Eve. This is the first reference to a death (in this case, an animal’s) being used to cover (atone for) sin. In Exodus 12:13, God’s Spirit “passes over” the homes that are covered (atoned) by the blood of the sacrifice. God requires blood for atonement in Exodus 29:41–42. The description of Messiah in Isaiah 53:4–6 says His suffering is meant to heal our wounds. The fact that the Messiah was to be “crushed for our iniquities” (verse 5) is a direct reference to penal substitution.

"During and after Jesus’ ministry, penal substitution is further clarified. Jesus claims to be the “good shepherd” who lays down His life for the sheep in John 10:10. Paul, in Romans 3:25–26, explains that we have the righteousness of Christ because of the sacrifice of Christ. In 2 Corinthians 5:21, he says that the sinless Christ took on our sins. Hebrews 9:26 says that our sins were removed by the sacrifice of Christ. First Peter 3:18 plainly teaches that the righteous was substituted for the unrighteous."

There's something really fishy here.

The "direct reference" described in the last sentence of the first paragraph cited above is rather subtle in that the verse doesn't say who does the crushing! 

(I am guessing that if questioned, 10 out of 10 eye witnesses that day would have said it was the Roman soldiers doing the crushing - not God.) 

Yes, most of those verses which Got Questions offers speak of some sort of substitution. But irrespective of the claim of that one sentence, not one explicitly speaks of God the Father punishing God the Son on the cross. (Most do not even hint at it.) 

Am I missing something? 

Perhaps you only see the penal part of penal substitutionary atonement if you already have PSA goggles on before you start reading Scripture.