Where The Old Testament Teaches Penal Substitution

Hey guys, today we're talking about the question of, did Jesus really die in my place to suffer the penalty for my sins? And while that may not seem like a huge issue, it is actually a major, major debate going on in Christianity. I say Christianity because a lot of the people who are on the wrong side of this debate aren't really Christian. And I don't say that to be harsh. It's just if Christianity is a thing and you reject the core of that thing, you're not actually Christian. Others, they're Christian, but I think they're just confused. William Lane Craig said that this one doctrine, penal substitution, is under attack more than any other view held during the Reformation time. Meaning that amongst like Protestants or evangelicals, this is the biggest doctrine that's under fire right now. And I'm defending it in this series.

Today, we're looking specifically at the Old Testament. And what does the Old Testament say about why Jesus died? Did he die for my sins? That's the concept. Was it for my sins? And I'll get more detail as we go here. But I think this is the most important question that we can ask in this whole series, this video, and the sister videos I make that are about the biblical case for penal substitution. These are the videos that are the most important to me personally, but all of them are going to be very important to others.

By the way, welcome. And by the way, I met several of you guys at Rethink Apologetics, the conference, and also at the Unbelievable Conference in Calvary Chapel, Costa Mesa. And I just want to say hi to you guys. It was great to shake your hands and see your faces, and I was very encouraged by just getting to connect with you.

All right. So, here's the series. And by the way, I'm Mike Winger. This is the Tuesday live stream every Tuesday at 5:00 PM Pacific Standard Time. You can join live or you can just watch it afterwards on the Bible Thinker app, on YouTube, on the podcast, the Bible Thinker podcast, or whatever's convenient for you.

So here we are in the middle of a series, and the series deals with three major accusations against penal substitution brought from progressives. Here's the accusations. One, it's unhistorical. Penal substitution is invented by Calvin or Anselm or some later person. They say it's not historical. I dealt with that last week, actually, and there's a playlist in the description with last week's video. Then the second objection is it's unbiblical. We're dealing with that this week, and it's the most important issue, and I'm going to go through it in great detail for that reason. And then finally, the third accusation, which will be a few videos down the road here, it's evil. That penal substitution is like immoral, unjust, and just downright evil. That's actually the accusation. Well, we're going to be dealing with that in future videos. And this appeals to either philosophical issues, legal issues, moral issues, and generally comes from a place of totally misrepresenting the doctrine of penal substitution. So that, and I've been having conversations with people who disagree with penal substitution, and they've heard such bad stuff about it that it seems they have a hard time thinking clearly about the issue. And these aren't people who don't think clearly. They've been sort of poisoned with these bad ideas, in my opinion. So I'll come to that topic later on. So stick around.

My request is, focus on the question of the video today. I can even see the live chat, like already, you know, filling with the moral objections. That's the distraction. The question we have right now is, is it biblical? That's the question. We'll deal with moral objections and all that later.

So, what is the doctrine of penal substitution? What do I mean when I say it? I mean it is the doctrine. I'm going to quote here from the book *Pierce for Our Transgressions*. This is the definition I'm working with. I read a bunch of definitions. I thought this one was really good. Listen carefully. The doctrine of penal substitution states that God gave himself in the person of his Son to suffer instead of us the death, punishment, and curse due to fallen humanity as the penalty for sin. Those are the elements right there, defined simply. There's an atonement or a dealing with my sin so that I might be reunited into fellowship with God. And it's achieved through penalty. The penalty that was due my sin, the curse upon my sin, coming upon Jesus, who's the substitute, who dies in my place, right? And there's more to it than that, but that's like the bare bones definition. Another way to put it is, penal substitution emphasizes that the punishment from God provoked by human sin was borne by Jesus Christ with his sacrificial death.

All right. Today, we're asking this: Is that biblical? Is that biblical? And we're going to go through the Old Testament passages. And we have to start in the Old Testament. People want to start with Romans and they want to start with Paul. And that's okay, except people are able to confuse people about Romans and Paul because they don't start with the Old Testament. And they're kind of like, I think they're pulling the wool of confusion over your eyes because they're not starting with biblical categories for the things Paul is talking about. So here we go. We're going to start with the Old Testament. Let me give you, we're going to do a lot of scripture today. Today's going to be a lot of Bible, as it should be.

Okay. So, the first scripture I want to share with you is John 5:46. This is where Jesus says, "If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote of me." In Jesus' mind, the life of Christ is predicted in the Old Testament. And that Moses, the law in particular, will give you an understanding of who Jesus is. This is what he's showing us. And there's other scriptures to support this as well. In Luke 24:44, Jesus says, "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled." Jesus thinks that this stuff was written about him and that he's fulfilling it. So that if you want to understand Jesus, you have to understand the Old Testament. And that's why God gave them the Old Testament, that they would understand Christ when he showed up. So trying to understand the doctrine of penal substitution or of what Jesus did on the cross for me without taking into consideration the Old Testament is like ignoring all the hard work God did to make it clear, to make it clear what he was doing.

He then goes on in verse 45. He says, "Then he opened their minds to understand the scriptures and said to them, 'Thus it is written that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance for the forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.'" He says it's written that Christ, the Messiah himself, should suffer and on the third day rise, and that people, it would be preached to people that they could repent and simply be forgiven. And so this is central to who? Yeah. To understanding the cross, you got to understand the Old Testament. That's the idea.

There's one more here. Matthew 5:17, where Jesus says, "Do not think I've come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish them, but to fulfill them." To fulfill them. The idea Jesus is fulfilling the law and the prophets. This would include the sacrificial elements of the law. Think about that. How much of the law is about sacrifice in the book of Leviticus, in Numbers, in the experiences during the Exodus? How much of this is about sacrifice? How much of the whole tabernacle system and the Levitical priesthood is all about sacrifice? You need these categories to understand Jesus's sacrifice because he's fulfilling those things.

The New Testament also continually uses the Old Testament to understand what Jesus did. I mean, like a lot, a lot. It does this constantly. It doesn't ever preach Jesus in a vacuum without the Old Testament as the foundational truths that are being sort of understood now in the light of Christ. The word "fulfilled" is constantly being used, and especially in relation to the cross. Jesus's cross is a fulfillment of such and such. That's the idea in the New Testament, in shadows and pictures and living metaphors, that kind of thing. Also in the terms that we see in the New Testament that are understood by the Old Testament: ransom, Passover, propitiation, offering, high priest, sacrifice, blood, right? All those things, atone. All these things, they come from the Old Testament, and their meaning is established there, and then we bring it into our understanding of what Jesus did on the cross. So this is where we get 1 Corinthians 15:3, where Paul says, "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins." But he didn't just die for our sins. He died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures. So that's why we got to start with the Old Testament, because the New Testament understanding is built on an understanding of the Old Testament.

Now, there are too many key passages, to be honest, to even go through in one video. In fact, I'm going to do Isaiah 53 next week. I can't even get into it this week because I want to do a whole video on just that one. But we're going to talk today about two special passages: Exodus 12 and Leviticus 16. We're going to talk about the Exodus or the Passover event. And we're going to talk about the Day of Atonement, and how these give us. And now, now hear me here, because this is like my synopsis statement for this video. Here's the case I'm making. For those who want to refute me or disagree with me in the comments, please, you're welcome to, but make sure you're refuting what I'm actually saying. I'm saying that the concepts of penalty and substitution are established in the Old Testament as being part of the sacrificial system. And then Jesus in the New Testament is said to fulfill that very system and those specific sacrifices, so that through the Old Testament, I can establish that Christ had a penal and substitutionary atonement. There's my synopsis for you, and I'm going to try and build that case right now. This is deep theology stuff. Welcome. This is what we do here. We answer tough questions. Sometimes they're just culturally weird questions. Sometimes they're biblically thoughtful questions. Sometimes, like right now, we just need to recover what is so incredibly obvious because it is being preached against by some well-meaning individuals and some people who are just poop faces and everyone in between.

So, as you all know, all right, Exodus 12, we're going to dig into the Passover. Let me just start by talking about the significance of the Passover. The significance of the Passover for Israel is huge. Like, this is one of the feasts of Israel. That's true. So it's, but it's not like, okay, like in America, we have these holidays. We celebrate Valentine's Day, but the significance of Valentine's Day as it pertains to like the deep meanings of life is like, you know, it's not really super significant. A lot of our holidays, we still have the holiday, but we lost the meaning behind it in some cases, you know? Like Fourth of July is like firework day, you know? And some people, you know, think about the independence of our country and what all that means and what freedom means and protecting the rights of individuals and things like that. And others are just thinking about, you know, a day off and barbecue. And so, what I'm saying here is Passover was more important to the Jews than Fourth of July was, I think, even to the Americans who care about it. This is a really big deal. It marks the calling of God on Israel and Israel's birth as a nation. So there's a parallel there to, you know, say Fourth of July, but there's more to it than that. It's commemorated in a yearly feast. Every year, Israel would gather together and they would engage in the Passover feast and these specific activities. I won't get into super great details about them, but the killing of the Passover lamb and the eating of it with a family is central to these feasts.

Passover celebrations are prominent at many really important times in Jewish history in Israel. In Numbers 9, we read about how when Moses receives the law before departing Mount Sinai, they celebrate Passover. When they're entering the promised land, just before conquering Jericho, it's the first piece of the land they're going to possess. And what do they do before that? They celebrate Passover in the book of Joshua chapter 5. When Josiah reforms the nation and they have a great revival because he rediscovers the word of God there, 2 Kings chapter 23, they have Passover, right? That's the reform of the nation. First thing to do, Passover. When Hezekiah has a reform of the nation, 2 Chronicles chapter 30, first thing he does, he has Passover. They did it right away after being exiled from the land for 70 years, when they were brought back after the Babylonian exile in Ezra chapter 6, 19-21, Passover, right? That's so central. This is where Israel gets its nationality from as a nation called by God to be his own people. And I'm going to say that this Passover sacrifice, it's not just special to Israel. In the New Testament, it's especially related as a symbol or a type or a way of understanding the death of Christ.

So, 1 Corinthians 5:7 says, "Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump as you really are unleavened. For Christ our Passover lamb has been sacrificed." Jesus, he's my Passover lamb. This is now, you see how much the Jewish understanding Paul has of what Passover means is important because he just straight up says Jesus is our Passover lamb and he's been sacrificed, and therefore we should live our lives according to that sacrifice. So this is kind of a big deal, kind of a big deal.

So let's talk about some context for the Passover. And we're going to understand Passover so we can understand Jesus. That's the idea, right? God promised Abraham, going back to Genesis, right? That he was going to give a land to the descendants of Abraham, and they would be a whole nation of people. Okay? So over 400 years later, that still hasn't happened. And that's where Passover comes in. The Israelites have grown in number. There's a lot more of them now, not just the 70 that went in approximately, but there's a lot more now. And now God says, "I'm going to make you a nation. I'm going to pull you out of the land of Egypt." But they're in really bad shape. They're in bondage. They have not seen the fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham, not even close. And so God's going to deliver them from these Egyptians who won't let them go. But he delivers them not just by saying, "Hey, let my people go," and he lets the people go. Rather, God delivers them through 10 horrible plagues that he brings upon the Egyptians. Sometimes all of the people, sometimes just some of the people that are living in the land.

So Passover is about what happens in the 10th plague, the final plague. That's where Passover comes in. It's the culmination of all these things. It's like the big buildup is to Passover, and boom, this is the one where Pharaoh finally says, "Okay, I will let the people go." In other words, this event triggers the release of the people and the birth of the nation. It's kind of a big deal.

There's two different aspects or acts of salvation that happen in the concept of Passover. Now, progressives will agree. Progressives, that's my nickname here for people who are fighting against penal substitution. Not everyone's necessarily progressive. There's always outliers in every group, but generally speaking, they're progressives. They're going to agree with me here on the first act of salvation that happens in the Passover. In the Passover, God is delivering the Israelites from the tyranny of the Egyptians by means of judging the Egyptians. Now, generally, they're going to agree with me on this. They're going to say, "Yeah, yeah, yeah. This is a model, Mike, for how God delivers people from bondage and the control of hostile powers." They'll agree with that. They'll say, "Hey, sin, the world, Satan." They this parallels to Jesus. Jesus delivers us from sin, the world, and Satan. And God conquers those things. And his judgment on the tyranny of the Egyptians. And they try to usually depersonalize it. It's not really judgment on people. It's his judgment on like things like tyranny, all that kind of thing.

But there's a second aspect of salvation or act of salvation happening in the Passover that's missed or ignored or purposely covered up by individuals. And that is this salvation from God's own judgment by means of a Passover sacrifice. And that's what Exodus 12 is all about, and that's where we're going to go right now. So by establishing that Christ is our Passover, or tell you know, I've established that. Now, if I'm going to say Passover involves salvation from judgment from God, the implication is that Christ's sacrifice on the cross is saving us from God's judgment. That's the parallel that I'm trying to build here.

This is what Exodus 12 is all about. The Passover lamb was not needed to deliver Israel from Egypt. Think about this. God didn't need to deliver Israel from Egypt, not with a Passover lamb. He could have just slew the firstborn. Boom. Delivery done. The Passover lamb was needed in order to keep God from judging Israel the same way he was judging Egypt. That's why it was needed. And that's how the Passover teaches penal substitution. It's in this concept of this lamb and how it's going to save the firstborn of the people of Israel.

So, let me give you a quick summary of the Passover. We'll scroll through some of these verses that are here up in front of us. We'll start in verse six, and we'll see this that the killing of the firstborn was an act of judgment. This was an act of judgment. And if the killing of the firstborn is an act of judgment, then the Passover lamb that saves them from it is delivering them from judgment. And Jesus, our Passover lamb, delivers us from judgment. Okay?

So here, Exodus 6:6. "Say therefore to the people of Israel, 'I am the Lord, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will deliver you from slavery to them, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great acts of judgment.'" So God's going to redeem them with an outstretched arm, but not just an arm of helping, but acts of judgment. God coming against sin. And for those who want to say God's judgment isn't ever him coming against sin, good luck. Good luck saying that biblically. Like, that's just not true. The problem here is probably you just think judgment's bad, and so you're trying to find a way to get out of it. But judgment is not bad. It's good. It's a wonderful thing. It's part of God's goodness.

Exodus 12:12 reinforces this. It says, "For I will pass through the land of Egypt that night, and I will strike all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast, and on all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments. I am the Lord." This act, this is an act of judgment. God is not just doing deliverance, he's doing judgment. And he's doing judgment in the striking of the firstborn. So God will judge by killing the firstborn. Some want to say that God just doesn't judge people. I mean, that's just obviously false throughout the text of scripture. That's obviously not true.

Judgment in the book of Exodus though is like a legal term. It's like a legal term. It's like I'm exacting the rightful, you know, moral penalties upon you for what you deserve because of what you've been doing. Some people like to say that judgment is not this. That judgment is just God judging the things that hurt you. Let's think about that for a minute, because I really see this in response to penal substitution or the idea of God having judgment or wrath is that God's only mad at the things that hurt you. This is, in my mind, this seems like a really narcissistic view of life. That God is only interested in me and what helps me. But while I would agree that sometimes God is judging the things that hurt me, other times he's judging me. I mean, read the scriptures, you know? Read right here. He's executing judgment on the firstborn in the land of Egypt. This is not delivering them from their evil firstborn or something like that. No, this is judgment. This is what's happening in the text. So, what's happening in real life? We see both God sometimes judges that which hurts you, and sometimes he hurts you as judgment. There, there we go. And already I'm like losing people, right? I'm people are upset with me. They're some people are upset with me here. And I'm going to say, I will deal with your moral objections to this stuff later. Let me build a biblical case right now. This is the biblical case. I'll deal with the moral objections later. I feel like those things, they come in and they rob us from even reading the scripture because someone just feels like I won't even allow it to say that because it bothers me so much, and we need to not do that.

So they had sin, and this was God's day of judgment or punishment on their sin, and the sacrifice of the Passover lamb's going to avert that punishment that would fall on them. But some will say, "But wait, Mike, judgment was on the Egyptians, not the Israelites. The Israelites sacrificed the lamb, but they didn't need to be saved from God's punishment because the Egyptians were the only ones being punished for their oppression because the whole gospel is really about punishment for oppression or something." But no, sadly, this is not the case. If we just read one more verse down, we find out something very different, which is that even Israel is under this judgment. Verse 13: "The blood shall be a sign for you on the houses where you are. And when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and no plague will befall you to destroy you when I strike the land of Egypt." So that Israel, they are under the same judgment. We established it was judgment. Israel's under it too. And the way they won't be under it is the blood of this animal. That's how they will not be under the judgment. This is unlike plagues 4 through 9. Plagues four, five, six, seven, eight, nine. Those plagues just didn't touch Israel, right? They fell on just the Egyptians. But plague 10 is on everybody, and that's the one that symbolizes Christ in particular, according to the New Testament.

So, why is Israel under judgment? That's the next question. And this is a good question, actually. We should ask this, like, why is Israel potentially in danger at the sacrifice of the Passover at that moment? Why is their firstborn going to die? Well, Exodus 20:5 tells us that there was a problem with the Israelites in that they were idolaters, just like the Egyptians. Let's read verses 5-8 here. "You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain." Is this... Oh, those are great verses, but again, I just typed in the wrong passage. Ezekiel 20:5. Forgive me. I'm really, I'm normally very professional, except when I'm actually doing live streams. Here's the passage I was looking for. And say to them, "Thus says the Lord God, on the day when I chose Israel, I swore to the offspring of the house of Jacob, making myself known to them in the land of Egypt. I swore to them, saying, 'I am the Lord your God.' On that day, I swore to them, saying I would bring them out of the land of Egypt into a land that I had searched out for them, a land flowing with milk and honey, the most glorious of all lands.' I said to them, and here you got to listen. Here's what God told him: 'Cast away the detestable things your eyes feast on, and every one of you do not defile yourselves with the idols of Egypt. I am the Lord your God.' But they rebelled against me and were not willing to listen to me. None of them cast away the detestable things, and you know, they didn't get rid of the idols." The implication is God is saying, "They're already worshiping idols. I need them to cast those idols away." Israel was not like this perfect set-apart people. They weren't seen as the holy ones amongst the wicked ones. No, they're as bad as the Egyptians in some ways. And God is redeeming them through a sacrifice to cover their sin.

So I read the rest of this verse right here at the end of verse eight. "Then I said I would pour out my wrath upon them and spend my anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt." And then he goes on to talk about how, so they earned God's wrath. He doesn't give it to them. He gives them a covering. That is this sacrifice we read about in Exodus 12.

So, what now? What now? Let's see. We go to Exodus 13:1. And we learned that the lamb, the Passover lamb. So, the problems are God's judging. The judgment will fall on Israel, and they will suffer too. And then here's the solution. Here's how they'll get out of the judgment of God. This is so like the cross. Verses 11-15 of Exodus 13 gives us the idea that this is substitution. We get the element of substitution in the Passover sacrifice, the picture of Jesus. "When the Lord brings you into the land of the Canaanites, as he swore to you and your fathers, and he shall give it to you, you shall set apart to the Lord all that first opens the womb. All the firstborn of your animals that are the males shall be the Lord's. Every firstborn of a donkey, you shall redeem. And there's that word redeem with a lamb. Or if you will not redeem it, you shall break its neck. Every firstborn of a man among your sons, you shall redeem." Meaning they can't do child sacrifice. They have to. He's claiming the firstborn, but he's going to make them redeem the firstborn. So it's just about a picture. He's just drawn a picture with it. Which Jephthah should have paid attention to in the book of Judges. You don't. God doesn't want human sacrifice. He rejects that in every possible way in the Old Testament. "Every firstborn of a man among your sons, you shall redeem. And when in time to come, when in time to come, your son asks you, 'What does this mean?' Ah, this is great. Now we're getting the explanation. Why are we doing this redemption of our sons? Here's the explanation in verse 14. 'By a strong hand the Lord brought us out of Egypt from the house of slavery. For when Pharaoh stubbornly refused to let us go, the Lord killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man and the firstborn of animals. Therefore, I sacrificed to the Lord all the males that first open the womb, but all the firstborn of my sons I redeem.'" So, this is a substitutionary thing. Oh, there was a striking of the firstborn, but there was a substitution instead. And we're going to keep doing this every year. Every year when the firstborn are offered, we're going to offer something instead of our sons because we're just trying to say there's a substitute there. Why are we doing this? To remember about the substitution that God provided in the Passover. There's clearly substitutionary language that's here. So, we have judgment and substitution. We have penalty and substitution. These are the elements of penal substitution that I'm trying to push for here in my series.

Let's see. Side note, Ezekiel chapter 45, it actually mentions a future Passover sacrifice being, quote, "a sin offering." Ezekiel 45, this like eschatological future Passover sacrifice. It calls it a sin offering, which is additional language we don't get in other places. In the New Testament light, I shared earlier 1 Corinthians 5:7. And I'll come back to the New Testament. We talked about the Passover somewhat. They mention that Christ is our Passover and he's been sacrificed for us. So he's not just the feast of Passover in general. He's the actual like sacrifice of Passover. He's the lamb that sacrificed, which is we understand a substitute, right? A substitute for us or for our firstborn. So in the Passover image, he would die instead of them dying. This was a picture fulfilled by Jesus, and Jesus is the ultimate penal substitutionary sacrifice. I'm not saying that's all that there is to the cross is penal substitution. We're just saying that it's there. That's the case we're making here.

At the Last Supper, Jesus really reinforces this, right? He takes the Passover sacrifice. That's the event, by the way, the Last Supper. That event is happening during Passover week. So it's when this commemoration is happening, when all these images are in the minds of the Jews. And Jesus takes that moment and it says, "He took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, 'Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.'" Do you get the idea there? It's for the forgiveness of sins. He's like, "Hey, this Passover thing, I'm fulfilling it. My blood, that's sacrificial terminology, is going to be for your forgiveness." Now, in other views, they generally don't view the blood of Christ as necessary for sin, for the forgiveness of sin at all. I've had conversations with people who reject penal substitution, and I have yet to hear a sensible way in which the blood of Jesus, his blood, brings us forgiveness of sin. Usually, they just think it inspires us to accept God's forgiveness or it gets us to change our attitude about sin. And I mean, I think those things are true, but that's not how you get forgiveness from God. That's what Jesus is giving us here, and that's what penal substitution accounts for.

So Jesus, he's killed after, you know, he has this revelation of his whole main mission. He uses Passover to explain it. Then he's killed during Passover, and this was a special time. Jesus could have died at any time of the year he wanted. He was in control, full control, the whole time. In John 7:6, it says he didn't want to die all the time, right? He's like, "My time has not yet come, but your time is always here." He tells them, like, "Now's not the time." In John 7:30, he does it again. So they were seeking to arrest him, but no one laid a hand on him because his hour had not yet come. So you get the idea that Jesus couldn't just die at any old time. In John 8:20, we get it again, and we get this throughout all the Gospels, but John highlights it the most. "These words he spoke in the treasury, as he taught in the temple, but no one arrested him because his hour had not yet come." It wasn't time. But then when Passover comes, there he orchestrates and purposely triggers his own crucifixion when he goes into Jerusalem on the, you know, at the week before, you know, the Passover, and he's on Palm Sunday, and there he is, declaring himself king of Jerusalem and of Israel, and that's what triggers his crucifixion.

Not only this, when John the Baptist introduced Jesus the first time, he introduced him as the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. Think about this, because the lamb in particular is probably a reference to the Passover lamb. So we have like John the Baptist, Jesus, the disciples, we have the Apostle Paul. We have so many references to Christ as Passover lamb. How can we not use this to interpret the meaning of his death? It was given to us by God for that very reason. And it's definitely penal and substitutionary.

In 1 Peter 1:18, "Knowing that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot." That's literally a description of the Passover lamb. It had to be without blemish or spot. So I'm purchased. I'm ransomed. That's Old Testament terminology. Something that's given to God so that you don't have to kill this thing. You ransom. That's the idea. And so Jesus is my ransom, and he's my Passover sacrifice.

Yeah. I like how *Pierce for Our Transgressions*, they put it on page 38 of their book. And for those because some don't like that book, that's fine. I'm not just reading that one book in my preparation for this series. So I would say don't discount me just because you don't like a book. Here are the actual points I'm making. But here's what they said on page 38, which I like. They said, "Just as the firstborn sons of Israel were spared from God's judgment at midnight on account of the blood of a lamb slain in their place, so God's new covenant people will be spared from his judgment on the final day through the substitutionary death of the Lord Jesus Christ."

Now, I have more stuff on the Day of Atonement and all that in a video in the description where I talk about Jesus and the Passover sacrifices in particular. But right now, we're going to take a breath because that was like part one. Okay, there's the cat cam for you. There's Moxy. Maybe I can see if she's... Is she sleeping? Yeah. Yeah, she's sleeping. Okay, get you guys refreshed. Are you ready to go talk about the Day of Atonement? That was one thing. The Passover sacrifice, it involves penalty aspects of, you know, judgment and substitution, and Jesus's fulfillment in both of those ways. And now we have the Day of Atonement. Let's get into this. Here it is. Round two.

The Day of Atonement is in Leviticus 16. And it's another feast of Israel. The Passover is a commemoration of how God saved his people in Exodus and how he bought them to himself, how he creates a people for himself. But the Day of Atonement is a whole different kind of thing altogether. It's a time of fasting. It's a time of a special sacrifice, a ritual once a year. This one special sacrifice, more than any other throughout the year, the calendar of Israel. This one sacrifice is meant to deal with sin. That's the Day of Atonement. It's to be the day to atone people. It deals with the huge, huge problem of sin. And you have to understand this. This problem is at the heart of the Day of Atonement. People's sin is what the Day of Atonement is all about. And those who deny penal substitution sometimes want to say that Jesus's death has nothing to do with dealing with sin in the sense of achieving forgiveness for our sins. But that's just simply, you can't hold that and take a serious look at scripture, I don't think.

Okay. Let me talk about the sin problem so we can understand this in greater detail. The sin problem goes like this: God wants to dwell with his people. He wants to dwell with his people. Not just deliver them. He doesn't just want to save them from the Egyptians. He wants to be with them. He wants a relational experience with the people. God with us. That's the idea, right? This is what gets finally achieved in Christ. He's God with us. Emmanuel, God with us. I am forever united to God in Christ. That's the idea. So we see him doing this in some ways in the Old Testament to picture this concept fulfilled in Jesus. We see the pillar of cloud by day and fire by night. So he's with the people of Israel, traveling with them. This will be the purpose of the tabernacle. Actually, the purpose of the tabernacle is so that God can be dwelling with his people. So everything about the tabernacle should be viewed through its overall meaning or overall purpose. The tabernacle is about God being with people. That's why it's actually originally called the Tent of Meeting. Like that was the first name for it, the Tent of Meeting, because it's just where God and man meet. That's the idea. Later, this tabernacle, the tent was built into the temple, and all this stuff symbolizes Christ in beautiful ways. I've talked about in my video on the tabernacle in my Jesus in the Old Testament series.

But there's these two issues that come into play when God tries to become near humans. God is holy, and people are sinful. This is illustrated well on Mount Sinai when the nation encounters God's presence. We can read about this in, let me get us back to our Bible software in Exodus 19:9. We read about the idea that, well, let me read it to you. Verse 9, here we go. "And the Lord said to Moses, 'Behold, I am coming to you in a thick cloud, that the people may hear when I speak with you, and may also believe you forever.'" So we got this sense of like, you know, Exodus makes a big deal about God's presence coming near the people. Although he doesn't really come as it's not like he just comes down and dwells with them like in the Garden of Eden, right? No, no, no. There's like this still this distance that's created there. God wants to be with people. And we'll talk about why sin is a problem. Why sin, and most of you know this, but I need to build it biblically. I need to say that this is what scripture says and not just what modern Christians say.

Verse 15. "Then Moses went up on the mountain, and the cloud covered the mountain. The glory of the Lord dwelt on Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days. And on the seventh day he called to Moses out of the midst of the cloud. Now, there was the appearance of the glory of the Lord like a devouring fire on the top of the mountain in the sight of the people. And Moses entered the cloud and went up on the mountain. And Moses was on the mountain 40 days and 40 nights." So we get this sense that God is there. He's on the mountain. He's nearish to the people, but they're not able to fully dwell with them. But his nearness causes problems. His nearness causes problems. And that's in Exodus 19:23. It says, "And Moses said to the Lord, 'The people cannot come up to Mount Sinai, for you yourself warned us, saying, "Set limits around the mountain and consecrate it."'" And the Lord said to him, "Go down and come up, bringing Aaron with you, but do not let the priests and the people break through to come up to the Lord, lest he break out against them." That term "break out against them," you follow it in scripture, it means God would kill them. That's the idea. When God breaks out against them, it means he's going to slay them. And so he's like, "If they even try to come here, I will destroy them." So warn them not to come near me. So God wants to be near his people, but if they come too near, they get killed. That's a problem.

This is illustrated really well in Exodus 33:3. "For I will not go up among you, lest I consume you on the way, for you are a stiff-necked people." This is part of the whole overall story. So this isn't the whole. This is just one verse out of context. So this isn't the conclusion. God will go up with the people, but in a beautiful way that represents Christ. It's the whole thing's really neat. But the idea is that the problem with God's nearness to his people is that it does provoke his judgment when they're sinful. Right? Right? We're not saying that God can't be in the presence of sinners for a millisecond without judging them, like as though he has no voluntary control over these things. We're just saying that God has revealed to us that when he dwells in the midst of his people and they sin, he will deal with that sin. So it's a problem because sin brings death. Like, he's not like he's just going to say, "Stop it. That's not nice." You know, he's going to judge them because sin is actually seriously wicked.

So the same glory and presence of God that can't go up with them in other locations is going to be in their presence in the tabernacle. And the tabernacle is going to be the solution. This is going to be like how God can be with his people. So sin's the problem. God wants to be with his people, but his presence will provoke his own judgment on their sin.

Verse 34. It says, "Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle." The tabernacle, which literally sat in the middle of the tribes of Israel, right in the middle of the people, and God's going to be there, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle, and Moses was not able to enter the tent of meeting because the cloud settled on it and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. So how does this work? Well, sin and punishment, they're regular themes in the Bible, right? With Adam and Eve, that the day you eat of it, you will die. With Noah in the flood, because of the sin of man, not because God just felt like it, because of the sin of man, there's the flooding of the world. Because of Sodom and Gomorrah's wickedness, they are judged. And Israel, they're sinful too. And so God can't be as near to them. And this is stuff that guys like, say, Brian Zand, they would never do a Bible study like this because they can't consistently look at the Old Testament without constantly disagreeing with it. We need to take what it says and let God's revelation tell us what Jesus is and who he is and what it means when he dies for us.

So the problem persists, right? The solution is the tabernacle. Why is the tabernacle where God can dwell with his people? Why does this work? The answer: sacrifice. Sacrifice. Holiness and sin. That's the problem. God still wants to be with his people. How will it be achieved? Sacrifice. That's the answer. And that's the book of Leviticus. The book of Leviticus, the functions of the tabernacle, all about sacrifice. I have a link in the description below about the five main sacrifices in the book of Leviticus and how those things picture Jesus Christ in detail. So I've already done that study. You guys can check it out. But the Day of Atonement in particular now is going to be like that once a year in the tabernacle sacrifice that deals with the sin of Israel so that God can be with them and not.

judge them for those things. It's the ultimate example of sacrifice dealing with sin and it totally pictures Jesus Christ. It's a ritual that involves sacrificing or sacrificing one goat and the other letting the other one go free. I'll talk about that in just a second. And it's the only time in the whole year of Israel where the high priest is allowed to enter into the holiest place inside that temple.

This ritual, this is super duper important. It actually just happened a few weeks ago in Israel this year. Although they don't celebrate it the way they did in the Old Testament, there is no temple, so they're not able to. And my contention to make sure I'm not losing you in all of the details here is that um I I think if you want to get what Jesus did on the cross, you have to understand the Old Testament. And after I explain the Day of Atonement, you'll and you see how the New Testament uses it, you will see how Jesus's sacrificed is is penal and substitutionary. But the strongest case will be Isaiah 53 that in the Old Testament and that's going to be next uh next time. Um although I don't know if I'll do this series next week or if I'll do like a one-off on something else and come back to this series. I haven't decided on that yet.

Okay. So this Day of Atonement once a year and the first thing you need to know about the Day of Atonement is the Day of Atonement is all about the word atonement. And this is really important. And I already I already know this video is going to be a long video. Um, unfortunately this series, it's hard for me to make it short. I guess I could have just cut it all up into individual videos, but then I feel like a long video is better than a bunch of shorter videos where people just lose interest in the series because that's the way humans are.

So, the Day of Atonement in Leviticus 16 verse1 17, we find out what it's all about. Uh, it says, "No one may be able to in uh may be in the tent of meeting from the time he enters to make atonement in the holy place until he comes out and has made atonement." There's that word again, for himself and for his house and for all the assembly of Israel. We call it the day of atonement because it's about atonement. That's the idea, right? And the scripture reinforces this. It's all about atonement. In verse 24 of Leviticus 16, which is our major chapter on this p on this day, it says, "And he shall bathe his body in water in a holy place and put on his garments and come out and offer his burnt offerings." This is about the high priest. and the burnt offering of the people and make atonement for himself and for the people. This is the day where atonement is made. Atonement is made.

Um now this is great because now we get right to the heart of one of the big debates in the topic of penal substitution which is what is atonement really about? Penal substitutionary what atonement? What is atonement about? And some people want to say well Mike atonement has a rich and varied usage and it really isn't about sin. And to that I would say atonement does have a rich usage but it is about sin. Um see it's it's they're right and wrong. It's always these eitheror statements you get from the other side on this particular topic that are just false either or statements or or someone would say but Mike atonement is just about objects. It's just about objects. It's not about people. It's just about cleansing the tabernacle. It's not about cleansing the people of their sin. And I've heard this and and some scholars say it. But look at what the scripture says. Thus he shall make atonement for the holy place because of the uncleanness of the people of Israel and because of their transgression transgressions and all their sins. The atonement for the holy place is because of the sin of the people. That is atonement deals with the sin of the people and it deals with the location where God can be in their midst in their presence. So it creates like a holy space for God. But the reason why atonement has to be made for stuff is because of the sin of people.

Um, some people want to make atonement all about uh just cleansing items, like ceremonially cleansing items and not dealing with people's sins. Well, obviously that's not the case. Leviticus 16:30 um says the following. For on this day shall atonement be made for you to cleanse you. You shall be clean before the Lord from all your sins. It's not just ceremonial, guys. This is sin. God's cleansing them from sin through the day of atonement. So, it's the sin issue that's being dealt with. In other words, penal substitutionary atonement is is connected to Old Testament concepts here.

Leviticus 16:32 through34 has some more info. It says, "And the priest who is anointed and consecrated as priest in his father's place shall make atonement wearing the holy linen garments. He shall make atonement for the holy sanctuary, and he shall make atonement for the tent of meeting and for the altar, and he shall make atonement for the priests and for all the people of the assembly." And so he does it for the the people as well, right? And this shall be a statute forever for you that atonement may be made for the people of Israel once in the year because of all their sins. So this atonement is all the day of atonement is all all about dealing with the sin of man, Israel's sin. So that what God can dwell in the midst of his people. That's the idea because atonement we think of atonement as re reunion, right? Reconciliation. It's bringing these two parties together that they might have love and fellowship. That's us and God. Penal substitutionary atonement says atonement, this reconciliation, it won't happen unless the sin issue is dealt with. And that's what Jesus does on the cross. Just like with the day of atonement, it won't happen unless the sin issue is dealt with. It's just what atonement means.

And so some of the various meanings of the word atonement, and I needed to cover this in the series somewhere, so I'll just do it right now. um in in the Hebrew the word is kapur or kipper or kapour there's different depending on the type of usage of the word you get different pronunciations but we'll just say kipper and there's various meanings uh one of the meanings is the word to cover atonement can mean to cover and some want to take that meaning and import it into all the meanings like the day of atonement well obviously it means more than covering there's something else going on here and it's been said that that in the um in the story of Noah the word atonement is used kipper is used and it's referring to uh covering the ark with pitch, but that is not a sacrificial Levitical use of the word. In Leviticus, it's never used just purely in the sense of to cover. Not that I'm aware of.

So, it's used to forgive. And I can show you in context. The way you learn the meaning of a word is you look at its use in context. So, in Leviticus 4:20, we see the word means to forgive. Thus shall he do with the bull. As he did with the bull of the sin offering, so shall he do with this. and the priest shall make atonement for them and they shall be forgiven. Ah so the result of atonement is forgiveness. So atonement involves forgiveness. In Leviticus 16:30 it involves cleansing in relation to sin in particular. So it's not just a ceremonial thing. For on this day shall atonement be made for you to cleanse you and you shall be clean before the Lord from all your sins. So this day of atonement is meant to cleanse you from your sins. This is what we call in fancy terms expeation. It it deals with my sin. It gets the sin of man out of man. How? Through the blood of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. This comes from the Old Testament, not from Calvin in the 1500s or anything like that.

It also has the concept of ransom in it in atonement. This is in numbers 35. I hope you find this really interesting because I sure do. And um and also really important because this is about um how God wants us to understand the sacrifice of Christ. You know, he labored to give us the Old Testament. So we would have this grid to interpret and understand what Jesus did. Numbers 35:29. And these things shall be for a statute and a rule for you throughout your generations and in all your dwelling places. Sorry, just checking my reference here. Um, okay. If anyone kills a person, the murderer shall be put to death on the evidence of witnesses, but no person shall be put to death on the evidence on the testimony of one witness. Moreover, you shall accept no ransom for the life of a murderer. Okay? So, this means you you know, if a murderer is given the death penalty, he can't give money to the the system to get out of it. There's no ransom for him. There's no exchange. There's nothing else that can go in his place. He has to die. So there you'll accept no ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death, but he shall be put to death. And you shall accept no ransom for him who has fled to his to the city of refuge that he may return to dwell in the land before the death of the high priest. You shall not pollute the land in which you live. For blood pollutes the land and no atonement can be made for the land for the blood that is shed in it except by the one of the blood who shed it. Why is this significant? uh because they're saying here's the reason why no ransom can be given, no exchange, nothing in his place, no substitutionary exchange, this murderer has to die. Why? Because no atonement can be given for murder under the law. Under the Old Testament law, Jesus, his blood covers even murder, but not the Old Testament law. So the idea of atonement and the idea of ransom are sisters here and one is connected to the other. So when Jesus says, "I give my life as a ransom," he's speaking in atonement language in the New Testament. Boom. That's, by the way, that's kind of like a big bomb I just dropped on you. I think I hope you appreciate that. That's pretty good stuff.

Um, so atonement is about getting you right with God. It's about getting you right with God. That's the idea. Uh, number four, the fourth or you know, definition of atonement or use of atonement as it relates to the the Levitical sacrifice system is that it turns God's wrath away from people. And this is really controversial. And I don't care. My question is, is it biblical? Is it in scripture? Read the scripture and ask yourself, is it connecting atonement to the idea of wrath? In Numbers 16:46, and Moses said to Aaron, "Take your sensor and put fire on it from the from the altar and lay incense on it and carry it quickly to the congregation and make atonement for them." Why? For wrath has gone out from the Lord. The plague has begun. So Aaron took it, as Moses said, and ran into the midst of the assembly. And behold, the plague had already begun among the people. And he put on the incense and made atonement for the people. Atonement here did not only deal with sin. It dealt with wrath. It dealt with God's wrath. There was this is this incense. It's said to be like a pleasing aroma. It brings some sort of pleasure to God and it deals with his wrath. Now, some will try to conjure up images of God and his petty anger and wrath. And I say that is an un unbiblical and even satanic perspective on God. God's wrath is good. God's wrath is appropriate. And the picture being drawn here is that atonement deals not only with the sin of man, but it deals with the wrath of God. And that's in Numbers chapter 16 verse 46 and 47. Atonement is about getting you right with God. That you can have relationship with him. Forgiveness, cleansing, ransom, and dealing with God's wrath. That's in the word atonement. And the day of atonement, boom, pictures all this. And it is used in the New Testament to reference Christ.

So, um, quick now overview of the Day of Atonement, a couple of the elements in it, and then we'll go right to the New Testament texts, and then I'm going to go to your guys' questions. Um, the Day of Atonement was a once a year thing that was to deal with sin, deal corporately with the sin of Israel. That was like the purpose of the day of atonement. We see a picture of Christ in that, right? Um, his one sacrifice to deal with all sin. The um there were there were the people were to afflict themselves. It was the one day of the year where they were to afflict themselves, and it has the idea of confession. They're actually told to confess. It's the only time they're told to do this as part of one of the feasts. And there's two goats in this story. One of them's killed. We read about this in Leviticus 16 verse 15 and 16. 16 verse 15 and 16. Uh this is the goat that's killed and this picture is Christ. Then he shall kill the goat of the sin offering that is for the people and bring its blood inside the veil and do with its blood as he did with the blood of the bull. sprinkling it over the mercy seat that's inside the heart of the tabernacle, the holy of holies. And in front of the mercy seat, thus he shall make atonement for the holy place. That's how atonement's made. It's the killing of this animal and the sprinkling of the blood. Uh because of the uncleanness of the people of Israel and because of their transgressions, all their sins. And so he shall do for the tent of meaning which dwells with them in their midst uh in the midst of their uncleanness. So that's one of the goats. It dies simply put to deal with their sins. That's it. End of story. It's going to it's going to get rid of their sin issues.

Uh then there's another uh animal and it's a goat and it's released. It's not killed, it's released. This is peculiar. They would do this on the day of atonement. One one goat was killed, one was set go set free. But look at the description of what they would do to it before they set it free. Leviticus 16:20. And when he's made an end of atoning for the holy place and the tent of the meeting in the altar, he shall present the live goat. See, this goat's not going to die. And Aaron shall lay both his hands on the head of the live goat. both his hands. He puts them on the live goat. Remember, Aaron represents all the people. And confess over it all the iniquities of the people of Israel. So Aaron's like, I'm going to confess. He's like, we've done this and we've done that and we've done this and we've done that. And he just goes on and on confessing all the sins of the people and all their transgressions, all their sins. The emphasis all all here. And he shall put them on the head of the goat and send it away into the wilderness by the hand of a man who is in readiness. And what is the goat doing? Why is this? What's the purpose of this goat? The goat is taking the sins on himself and then he and it flees away. And in verse 22, it says, "The goat shall bear their iniquities on itself to a remote area and he shall let the goat go free in the wilderness." Keep this in mind because when I get to Isaiah 53 and it talks about the Jesus as the sinbearing servant, it's referring to the sacrificial language of things like the day of atonement. So, he's going to bear their iniquities and he goes away. The idea of the goat is simply the sins are gone, right? There's a sacrificial goat and there's a goat that goes free. And there's these two pictures. One is there's a death to to atone for your sin. And the other is your sin is gone. As far as the east is from the west, so far as he taken our sins from us, the sin is gone. That's the picture we're getting in the day of atonement. The confessions there, the the dealing with sin. This is all about dealing with sin. Atonement doesn't work unless you deal with sin. That's why penal substitution is a an essential element in our understanding of the cross.

Oh, there's so much more I could say there, but I want to move forward because I've uh because of time and I'll come to Isaiah 53 next time around. Um, yeah, like 1 John 3:5 says, uh, you know that that he appeared in order to take away sins and in him there is no sin. He takes away our sin. The lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, that's the scapegoat, this picture of taking sin away. taking sin away. Oh, there's more. But let me move forward here because I want to get to the New Testament. Hebrews 9. Now, I struggle with this because here's the problem in these discussions on atonement. We talk about what the New Testament says about the Old Testament sacrifices. And it's essential that we understand this. But so often we're just we're quoting one verse here or one verse there. And we're missing that there's like this wealth of strength of connection between say the day of atonement and the suffering of Christ between the sacrifices and how they dealt with sin and how Jesus as our sacrifice deals with sin. And so what I need to do is I need to not read a verse. I need to read a giant section of scripture. So let me get a drink of water because what I'm going to read to you right now is Hebrews 9 and 10. Most of chapter 10 and all of chapter nine. I'm not going to stop for a lot of commentary. I'll I'll briefly pause here and there, but what you need is to hear the scripture. Hear now that you know the day of atonement. Now that you know Passover, hear what the New Testament says about it in the book of Hebrews and tell me if this is not showing that Jesus is our penal substitutionary atonement.

So here we are. Hebrews 9 starting in verse one. Now even the first covenant had regulations for worship and an earthly place of holiness. For a tent was prepared, the first section in which were the lampstand and the table and the pres of the presence. It is called the holy place. Behind the second curtain was a second section called the most holy place. Having a golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold in which was a golden urn holding the mana and Aaron's staff that budded and the tablets of the covenant. Above it were the cherubim of gold overshadowing the mercy seat. Of these things we cannot now speak in detail. These preparations having thus been made, the priests go regularly into the first section performing their ritual duties. But into the second only the high priest goes and he but once a year and not without taking blood which he offers for himself and for the unintentional sins of the people. Now Hebrews 9 is speaking of the day of atonement, the day of atonement because he only goes once a year and that's that that's that ritual. Verse 8. By this the Holy Spirit indicates that the way into the holy places is not yet opened as long as the first section is still standing, which is symbolic for the present age. According to this arrangement, gifts and sacrifices are offered that cannot perfect the conscience of the worshipper. But deal only with food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation, speaking of how Jesus, he comes and he fulfills these things. Verse 11. But when Christ appeared as high priest of the good things to come, the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent, not made with hands, that is not of this creation, he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves, but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. Remember the redeeming terminology that we read about. For if the blood of bulls and goats and the sprinkling of of defiled persons with the ashes of a hepher sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ who through the eternal spirit offered himself without blemish to God purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. Therefore, he is the mediator of a new covenant so that those who are called may receive the eternal promised uh the promised eternal inheritance since a death has occurred that redeems them from transgressions committed under the first covenant. Oh my goodness. Are you picking up on this? It's all about Jesus. Like penal substitution is is established through Passover, Day of Atonement, and other places. And it's fulfilled in Christ. verse u chapter uh chapter 9:16. For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. For a will takes effect only at death, since it is only in force as long as the one who made it is alive. Therefore, not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood. For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats with water and scarlet, wool, and hissip, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, saying, "This is the blood of the covenant that God commanded for you." And in the same way, he sprinkled with the blood of both the tent, sprinkled with the blood both the tent and all the vessels used in worship. Indeed, under the law, almost everything is purified blood. And without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins. Do you get that? This is okay. Look, I'm not out of my mind here. Hebrews is doing what I just did. Hebrews is saying, look at these types established in the Old Testament of how blood deals with sin. And now, let's apply this to Jesus. What's the principle we've learned? Without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins. Yet those who reject PSA want to say that without without Jesus's blood, you could still you would still be forgiven because God doesn't need a sacrifice. There needs to be no blood sacrifice to to forgive your sins. That just goes against scripture. Verse 23, thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rights, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ has entered not into the holy places made with hands which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. This is the high priestly terminology as the priest goes in on their behalf. Jesus on our behalf. Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own. For then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And just as it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin, but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him. And in case you didn't pick up on it before I continue reading, Jesus is seen as the high priest and the sacrifice. That's Hebrews 9. He's the high priest and the sacrifice, but he's better than them because they're only symbolic of what he did. He actually fulfilled it. The Old Testament establishes the concepts and the terminologies and the types and the principles, Jesus comes and accomplishes them. That's the idea of chapter 10 verse one. For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come, instead of the true form of these realities, it can never by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year make perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered? Since the worshippers having once been cleansed would no longer have any consciousness of sins. But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. See we have these two impossibilities right? You will not be forgiven without blood. Yet bulls and goats aren't good enough to do it. These are two problems. So the solution is Jesus. Verse 5. Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said, "Sacrifice and offerings you have not desired, but a body you've prepared for me. In burnt offerings and sin offerings, you've taken no pleasure. Then I said, "Behold, I have come to do your will, oh God, as it is written of me in the scroll of the book." See, Jesus is the sacrifice that does what those sacrifices only pictured but couldn't actually do. That's the meaning. Now, progressives want to take this passage and act like Jesus is rejecting sacrifice. No, he is fulfilling it. Um, it's just a butchery of Hebrews, which is why I'm reading the whole chapter in context. So, you can see that verse eight, when he said above, you have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings. These are offered according to the law. Then he added, behold, I have come to do your will. He does away with the first in order to establish the second, and by that will have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all, like the day of atonement, but fulfilled. Verse 11. Every priest stands daily at his service offering repeatedly the same sacrifices which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God waiting from that time until his enemy should be made his foottool foottool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified. Man, I'm perfected in Christ's offering. the the permanence and the totality of what Jesus did for me. I'm cleansed by a sacrifice that Jesus made. And it's a sacrifice akin to the Old Testament sacrifices but better. Verse 15. And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us. For after saying, this is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord, I will put my law in their hearts and write them on their minds. Then he adds, I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more. Where there is forgiveness of these, there's no longer any offering for sin. I don't need an additional sacrifice because Jesus has accomplished it all. I'm forgiven in Christ. Couple more verses and we're done. Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain that is through his flesh, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near with true with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water. How on earth does somebody get around penal substitutionary atonement in these texts? I don't understand it. I literally don't understand it except that they would go, "Well, it's just I don't like the phrase wrath of God. I don't like the phrase the wrath of God." And when you use it when you're talking about what Jesus did, it just drives me nuts. And I will say, I will I think I'll deal with that in a video by itself at some point. The whole concept of God's wrath and the tough questions people have and confusions about that. But clearly penal substitution is in the scriptures here. We're going to deal next time though with Isaiah 53 and dropped my phone here. But let me go to your guys' questions. Um, and I'm going to answer them now. I sure hope this is helpful to you guys. Again, to recap, the purpose of this is to tell you that there's a penalty element and a substitutionary element and that this relates to atonement in the Old Testament. And I'm drawing all these elements out to show us that it's Old Testament and New Testament consistent.

Here we go from Flora. She says, "Any tips on explaining atonement to a Jew? I was surprised that the ones I've met do not understand sacrifice and atonement in the Levitical system at all. It's now all good works. Thanks." You know what, Flora, you bring up like a super good point because modern rabbitical Judaism doesn't track with these Old Testament concepts of atonement very well. Um, and on the day of atonement, instead of offering a sacrifice and and they're being a substitute to pay for sin, instead of that, they simply do good works and they try to be good people to try to like work their own salvation, so to speak. And while it's good that they're trying to be good and it's good that they're thinking about, you know, moral issues in their lives, maybe sins they've committed, those kinds of things. That's all good qualities. But it doesn't fit the picture of the Old Testament. You see what happened was and maybe you can talk to them about this and say ask them this is a great question Flora say what do you think the differences are between Judy uh the the expression of Judaism before the destruction of the temple and after the destruction of the temple because here's a massive change in Judaism you know Old Testament Judaism and even first century Judaism early first century Judaism is nothing like modern Judaism in it as it relates to the specific actions that go on at the temple and all that. So, ask them about the differences. Help me out. Help me understand the differences. Ask them if they've read through the Old Testament. Try to show them Isaiah 53, you know, and and ask them if they think that looks like Jesus Christ. Yeah. Maybe maybe take them through a video like this if they're willing to listen.

Dustin Neely says, "Can you please explain how atonement was made by Aaron in Numbers 16 since it doesn't seem like PSA?" Um, Numbers 16. Let's go to that passage. verses, where is it? 46. I'll just read it to us here. Let me put it up on the screen. And Moses said said to Aaron, "Take your sensor and put fire on it from off the altar and lay incense on it and carry it quickly to the congregation. Make atonement for them." So, this is one I read earlier. Uh, for wrath has gone out from the Lord and the plague has begun. And so, Moses or Aaron did it. Aaron took, as Moses said, and ran into the midst of the assembly. And behold, the plague had already begun among the people. and he put incense on and made atonement for the people. So, um, how does this work? I think the connection here is to understand something about the incense. Um, you see, and it and it's hinted at here. You don't notice this until you like really sort of carefully read through these texts, but he says, "Take your sensor and put fire on it from off of the altar." From the altar. Remember, Aaron's sons brought strange fire. Strange fire. What was the strange fire they brought? It seems that among other things, they didn't get their fire or their coals because you have to burn incense with something. They didn't get their coals from the altar. Why is it that the coals had to come from the altar? Because the altar is where the offerings to God were burned and the blood of the offerings would drip down onto those coals and the blood of the other blood they extracted from the offerings would be poured out at the base of that altar. By burning incense with those coals, we're incorporating the animal sacrifices into the offering that's being made to God. So, I would say it does have penal substitutionary elements in it because it does tie back to the animal sacrifices.

Um, William Lincoln says, "What do you think about people who are um what do you think about people are who don't believe in penal substitution? How does it change their doctrine?" Um, I think that it's problematic. I think it's problematic. Here's our our cat cam because our cat my cat moved. Um, when they start trying to explain how Jesus deals with sin and they're and they're trying to reject PSA or the concepts that are in PSA, they start to just sound empty to me. It starts to be like an atonement that has no foundation in why it works. Why does it work? Um, and it often ends up resulting in a description of the atonement where Jesus is purely offering me an encouragement to live better. And that's what his death does. It kind of encourages me to live better. And that and you know, and maybe the Holy Spirit works on me to encourage me to live better. But how is that dealing with my sin? And the answer I've heard from a couple people anyways is you know, Jesus's death doesn't deal with your sin. God just forgives your sin. Except God says he will not acquit the guilty in the scripture. and he demands the atonement sacrifice throughout the Old Testament. So anyway, but I'm back on my soap box. U yeah, so it does seem to affect their val their their understanding of how forgiveness actually works.

Uh Britty Chicky says, "Is the doctrine of penal substitution of primary or salvational importance when it comes to Christianity?" Um I'm honestly not sure how to answer that question. I am I don't feel comfortable saying it's a secondary issue. I really don't because I do think it has to do with what I'm believing about Jesus. Now, I think people are can be confused on it. Maybe some people who reject PSA are not saved. Maybe others who reject PSA are still saved and they're just radically confused. I don't know how to I just don't know how to split that hair. I just don't know. So, forgive me for not being able to be more helpful on that. But, I do think it's of extreme importance because it relates to what it means that Jesus died for me. And so, that's of incredible value and importance. And I think that we should um we should push the topic as a really important thing.

Um Sky says, "I understand our sins were imputed to Jesus, but is Jesus's righteousness imputed to us in exchange? What are your thoughts and what verses support this?" Um oh, can I remember it off the top of my head? Um a bunch of you probably already know and can put it right there in the comments section. Um, okay. What I want to do is bring it to if I can find it. Yeah, maybe. You know what? I'm I'm probably going to deal with imputation individually, but but yeah, there are there are specific verses. I'm sure you guys in the live chat can probably help me out here. There are specific text texts of scripture that talk about how um he became sin who knew no sin that we might become the righteousness of God in him. That's the verse I'm thinking of and I'm not I'm not finding it real quickly here. Um but yeah, he became sin who knew no sin that we might become the righteousness of God in him. And he became sin in an imputational sense. Our sins were imputed to him that I I became the righteousness of God. That is an imputational thing too. There's like a parallel that's going on there. So that's the verse I would the one verse I would recommend. Um let's see. Romans 1:16

radio says, "Penal substitution, while biblical, is insufficient to explain the atonement. Do you see a need for participation in the death of Jesus?" Romans 6. Um, yes. And and now here's something I want to really highlight. Romans 1:16 radio. Those who, and like myself, those who affirm penal substitution, and I mean I've never heard a single one, never who denies other elements of the atonement. I've never heard a single one. I'm not saying they don't exist, but I've never heard them. Um, even even guys who write on these topics, like in in church history, they affirm all these different aspects. They talk about, yeah, there's a representational aspect that's going on here, and that's super important in our theology. There is um there is Christ's moral influence. There is Christ as victor, and we see all this stuff as super important. Super important. Now, here's a here's a problem. The anti-PSA guys act and I mean they just straw man us and they act like those of us pushing penal substitution are actually saying this and nothing else or this is all we'll talk about and all we care about and no the reason why this is such a big deal is because they're denying it. They're saying not that not that. And so that's the that's the issue here. Um yeah so every guy I know that that promotes penal substitution promotes those other elements as well.

Uh Tony Bryant says, "Are there going to be notes on this available for us to print and study?" Mike, thank you. Um I don't know. Probably not, Tony. I'm sorry about that. Um it's just a matter of, you know, adding more things to my schedule of creating notes that would be for others. When I make notes for just me versus for other people, it's a different whole process. And but um but yes, you can there's a way to download um word for word everything I say. The automated um what what's the term? the automated subtitles. You can download that off of YouTube. There's a way to do that. I don't know the process, but I know it's free and you can do it. So, that might be somewhere to go if you want to print it and get a transcript.

Anna Boscher says, "If Jesus suffered for us and took the consequences of our sin, punishment, is this a picture of unbelievers judgment suffering for a period of time then perishing in this case for conditionalism? Suffering in fire for a period of time and then perishing." And then she has a passage there from Matthew about um thrown into jail until they've pay back what they've owed. Um I'm going to say that is a really interesting question, but I don't Here's the problem is I don't see how it really relates and maybe it's my own fault for not seeing it. Um I think that Jesus what what some people want to do is take and I got this question last time too. I think it was something like this. They want to take Jesus's death on the cross and say that's a case for annihilationism. That that when we when we die in sin, we just die. End of story. Or that we eventually stop existing. But where did Jesus stop existing here? He never stopped existing at any point. And so, yeah, I I don't think the duration of Jesus's punishment is the same as the duration of the punishment of sinners. I don't think there's any parallel there. I think that the quality of Christ's sacrifice of his offering uh being infinite in value and and his experience that is what makes it um redeeming for us as well as representationally he represents all mankind on the cross like the second Adam and all that. So there's different elements there that aren't about duration and so I just wouldn't go there personally.

Um Dark Matter says, "How do I respond to my Muslim brother who claims Jesus could not have paid for everyone's sin because he was only dead for three days?" Oh, I kind of just answered that. And I will get into this actually when I do my later objections because these are philosophical objections. Um, yeah, qualitatively Christ sacrifice was more than enough to pay for the sin of mankind. Duration of how long he was in the tomb is not part of that, I don't think.

Um Sky has another question. Uh, why did Jesus have to be beaten so bad by people when he was taking God's wrath? Wasn't God's wrath enough? Um, I think that infrequently in the Old Testament, God uses people to to punish Israel. So, it's people who attack Israel or he uses Israel to attack the Canaanites. He uses people to to exact judgment on others. And so, on the cross, I think we're seeing a a reflection of that. I think we're seeing the physical things Jesus going through meant to be a display of God's displeasure towards sin and it's being um put on Christ. And so, yeah, I hope that helps.

Um, Erica Delarosa says, "Are members of a cult that truly believe the teachings saved or are they deceived and may be saved? Does Galatians 18 apply to any cult?" Um, interesting question on cults. Are they de There's always a chance that a cult member is really saved and that they're not really holding to those cult ideals. And I'm talking about like core salvation issues where they where this makes this thing a cult and they reject those things. I met a Mormon one time who was like that. Called himself Mormon, but he utterly disagree with Mormon teaching and theology and I was like, you're not even really a Mormon. And I I just I don't know why he even called himself that. Now, do I have hope that there's like huge numbers of those kinds of people? Not especially. It seems to me that um that a lot of times that's not the case. And so, yeah, I don't think, however, if they affirm a false gospel that they're still saved. If you affirm a false gospel, I you know, you could theorize maybe there's some weird crazy psychological thing going on here, but I don't think scripture gives us real permission to do that. I think we're just supposed to say that's a false gospel. You're affirming it, you're not saved. You're rejecting the gospel of Christ. That would be um the short answer. Galatians 1:8 says, "Even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you another gospel contrary to the one which we preach to you, let him be accursed." And amen to that. Nothing's worse than preaching a false gospel.

Uh, two more questions. We'll call it a night. Michael Duke says, "Uh, hello, Mike. Is there anything in the Old Testament that addresses what was taking place with Jesus between his death and resurrection in the Old T, you know, I would really have to think about that a lot, Michael Duke. I have no idea. Good question. Anything in the Old Testament to address what was happening there?" Um, yeah, I'd have to really spend time on that. Interesting question.

Kevin Harper says, "Hey, Mike, can you clarify if you believe that God punished Jesus Christ?" Good question, Kevin, because here's a and Kevin, you've spotlighted a real issue in in the case for like barebones of what penal substitution means. We are open to saying Jesus suffered the punishment for our sins or Jesus was punished for our sins. You see, is he the is he the direct object of that punishment or does he just suffer the punishment? Meaning like the sins are like the object and he's the one who's like holding those sins, so to speak, and receiving the punishment. Um, and that I lean towards thinking that he was punished, but I'm but I would say to someone who goes, "Well, I can't swallow that. I just can't say that." I'd say, "Well, you're still penal substitution." You think he was punished for sins? And that's the barebones definition of the word. That can be like an in-house discussion on that topic. So, um, yeah, I think he was punished. My opinion, and I'll maybe I'll talk more about that as the series goes. As you guys see, this is an expansive topic. It gets into so many things, but at the at the base of it, it's just like I feel like we don't have any excuse for not accepting aspects of penalty and substitution in what Christ did so that we would be forgiven for our sins. Like, how do we get out of this? I don't see it.

So, I hope that this has helped and I hope that you guys have a wonderful day. I know this is a long video and for some of you, I'm like, you're welcome for me making a real long video and for others, uh, sorry for making a long video. I also realize this whole series isn't going to be as popular as some other content I make. I realize I could do other stuff that would be more popular, but I don't do it based on the popularity of it. I do it based on how important it is. So, while less people will watch it, I think it's really important, and I hope it blesses you. Have a great night.