I. DEFINITION
The Oxford English
Dictionary defines substitution as "the putting of
one person or thing in the place of another." When one
looks at the concept of substitution in theology it
refers to the death of Christ as substitutionary.
Another way to describe substitution is by the word
vicarious from the Latin word vicarius meaning
"one in place of another." To be precise, it is best
to describe Christ’s death as a penal substitution.
When we use the adjective "penal" to the word
substitution we are placing the concept of
substitution into the context of moral law, guilt and
retributive justice. J. I. Packer explains that penal
substitution is an "instrument for conveying the
thought that God remits our sins and accepts our
persons into favour not because of any amends we have
attempted, but because the penalty which was our due
was diverted onto Christ. The notion which the phrase
‘penal substitution’ expresses is that Jesus Christ
our Lord, moved by a love that was determined to do
everything necessary to save us, endured and exhausted
the destructive divine judgment for which we were
otherwise inescapably destined, and so won us
forgiveness, adoption and glory." In summary, penal
substitution is the death of Christ bearing the
punishment justly due sinners by the guilt of their
sins being imputed to Him (set down to His account) in
such a way that He representatively bore their eternal
punishment.
II. SUBSTITUTION IN THE
OLD TESTAMENT
The concept of
substitution is pictured in the life of Abraham and
Isaac in Genesis 22. God told Abraham to take the
promised seed, Isaac, and sacrifice him in a place
where God would show him. In this significant event
Abraham, the father, gives up his son as a sacrifice
while Isaac, the son, willingly lays down his life.
God demonstrates the significance of this event when
He intervenes and provides the ram as a substitute.
All the important features of Christ’s penal
substitutionary sacrifice are typically foreshadowed
in this event.
The concept of penal
substitution is also presented in the Old Testament
sacrificial system. One of the most explicit
statements on the substitutionary principle in the Old
Testament is found in Leviticus 17:11, "For the life
of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to
you on the altar to make atonement for your souls; for
it is the blood by reason of the life that makes
atonement." Here God indicates that the sacrificial
animal in its death takes the place of the death due
the offerer and makes atonement for his sin. Many of
the sacrifices required the offerer to lay his hands
on the animal before he would sacrifice it. The
meaning of this ritual is explained in the Day of
Atonement (Lev. 16). The high priest would lay his
hands on the second goat and confess the sins of the
people. Then the second goat would be lead into the
wilderness to symbolize the removal of the sins of the
people. The goats in the Day of Atonement typify the
penal substitutionary sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
Penal substitution can
also be seen in the feast of Passover (Ex. 12). The
Passover typified redemption with the blood of the
lamb. Applying the blood of the lamb on the two door
posts and the lintel of the house lifted the curse of
death of the first-born. God said "...when He sees the
blood...the LORD will pass over the door and will not
allow the destroyer to come into your houses to smite
you" (Ex. 12:23). The blood representing the life of
the animal became the substitute for the death of the
first-born. What is pictured in the Passover is
actually accomplished in the death of Christ. Paul
says in Galatians 3:13, "Christ redeemed us from the
curse of the Law, having become a curse for us...." It
is interesting that our Lord used the time of the
Passover to institute the Lord’s Supper, which is
given to remind Christians of Christ’s substitutionary
work for us.
The sacrificial system
is the heart of the Jewish worship and religious life.
The priests at the temple offered the burnt offering
every day both morning and evening. Sacrifices were
commanded at most feasts (Passover, Pentecost, Day of
Atonement, Tabernacles and others). There were
sacrifices for the redemption of the first-born, sins
committed by individuals, certain ceremonial cleansing
(i.e. after childbirth and leprosy) and dedications.
What the sacrificial system symbolized is vividly
expressed in Isaiah 53 and explicitly promised in
Jeremiah 31:31-37 by the New Covenant. Therefore, this
symbolic picture of penal substitution was woven into
the fabric of the Jewish mind who knew the Old
Testament. This is why the herald of the Messiah, John
the Baptist, could trumpet one statement and
communicate the penal substitutionary work of Jesus
Christ. "Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the
sin of the world" (Jn. 1:29).
III. SUBSTITUTION IN
THE NEW TESTAMENT
Penal substitution is
clearly established in the New Testament by the use of
two Greek prepositions anti and huper.
M. J. Harris summarizes the possible meanings for
anti: (1) "for" denoting equivalence—one object is
set over against another as its equivalent (Mt. 5:38;
1 Cor.11:15) (2) "for" denoting exchange—one object,
opposing or distinct from another; or one object given
or taken in return for the other (Rom. 12:17; Jn.
1:16) (3) "for" denoting substitution—one object, is
given or taken instead of the other (Mt. 2:2; Lk.
11:11). It is this last meaning that is clearly seen
in Matthew 20:28, "just as the Son of Man did not come
to be served, but to serve and to give His life a
ransom for (anti) many" (see also
Mk.10:45). The evidence is so overwhelming on this
point that those who object to the doctrine of penal
substitution usually concentrate their effort on the
preposition huper because most of the passages
in the New Testament that involves substitution use
the preposition huper. Yet, it needs to be
stressed that the doctrine of penal substitution is
established by the preposition anti.
The two predominant
meanings for the preposition huper in the
genitive case are in behalf of (representation)
and in the place of (substitution). The
substitutionary sense of huper is seen in the
following non-theological verses. In Philemon 13 which
says, "whom I wished to keep with me, that in your
behalf (or place—huper) he might minister to me
in my imprisonment for the gospel." In Colossians 1:7
Epaphras represented Paul and preached in his place.
In John 11:50-51 and 18:14 Caiaphas declares "it is
expedient for you that one man should die for (huper)
the people...." Harris concludes from these verses
that huper "denotes substitution, not simply
benefit or representation, since Caiaphas’ remarks
that such a death ‘for the people’ would ensure that
‘the whole nation’ did not perish.... That is,
politically the death of the one (as a scapegoat)
would be a substitute for the death of many." Dr.
Bruce Waltke demonstrates that both Romans 9:3 and
Philemon 13 are important non-theological verses,
which demonstrate substitution in the New Testament.
All the above verses demonstrate the substitutionary
sense of huper with no theological "axe to
grind" except for possibly John 11:50-51.
With huper
established as a preposition that does express the
concept of substitution, one can turn to 2 Corinthians
5:21 and Galatians 3:13 to demonstrate that this
substitution is penal. In 2 Corinthians 5:21 the guilt
of our sins are place on Christ when it says, "He made
Him who knew no sin to be sin [in our place] (huper)
that we might become the righteousness of God in Him."
In Galatians 3:13 the curse of our sins was placed on
Christ when it says, "Christ redeemed us from the
curse of the Law, having become a curse for (huper)
us—for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on
a tree.’" Finally, 1 Timothy 2:6 strongly supports
penal substitution when the preposition anti is
attached to the compound word antilutron
(ransom) with the preposition huper. "[Christ
Jesus] who gave Himself as a ransom (antilutron)
for (huper) all.…"
We must conclude from
our study of huper that the prepositions
anti and huper have overlapping meanings.
Both prepositions are used to convey the doctrine of
penal substitution. Therefore, we cannot dismiss the
doctrine of penal substitution just because the
preposition anti is not used. It seems that the
writers used huper because it was more
flexible. They could express both meanings of benefit
and substitution together and at once. The preposition
huper has a broader meaning then anti,
but they overlap to convey a substitutionary idea.
IV. APPLICATION
Penal substitution
strikes at the very core of the gospel. If the concept
of penal substitution is not clear in your salvation
presentation then you have a weak and unclear gospel.
In other words, penal substitution is the essential
core of the gospel.
Sin is the issue in
salvation for it offends a holy God, condemns men
eternally to hell and destroys lives. For God to be
just, every sin must be paid for. Either men will
eternally pay for their sins in hell or a qualified
substitute must pay for it and, therefore, eternally
free that individual from punishment. If you and I
were in prison and on death row (looking to be
executed soon), and you felt compassion on me and
would like to be my substitute and take my place at
the electric chair, do you think the chief officer of
the prison would let you take my place so I could go
free? No, he would not! Why? Who then would take your
place for you deserve to be punished in the same way?
The only way anyone could be considered to take
another’s place in prison on death row is if he is not
guilty of a crime and is not on death row. In a sense
we are all born into this world on death row for we
have all sinned in thought, word and deed and we all
deserve to be punished by God in hell forever.
However, God has provided a penal substitute for us
who has never sinned in thought, word or deed. Jesus
Christ, the sinless Son of God, took upon himself
flesh and came to earth and never sinned in any way
becoming the only person qualified to be our
substitute.
The suffering the Son
of God took at Calvary goes far beyond the physical.
He suffered the full force of God’s wrath for every
sin of every person who will believe in His saving
work. Paul says, "He made Him who knew no sin to be
sin on our behalf that we might become the
righteousness of God in Him" (2 Cor. 5:21). Therefore,
Jesus Christ’s substitutionary death and resurrection
has purchased salvation for all who will come to Him
through faith alone (Rom. 10:9-10). Salvation does
not come by being a good person, doing good
works, being religious, partaking the sacraments,
belonging to a specific local church, thinking my good
works will outweigh my bad works nor believing in
Christ plus doing good works! It is not what I do,
but what has been done that is important. I
must believe in what has been done in my place.
The Bible says, "For by grace [an undeserved gift] you
have been saved through faith; and that not of
ourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of
works, that no one should boast" (Eph. 2:8-9). Thank
God we have in Jesus Christ a penal substitute!
Endnotes
i. J. I. Packer,
"What Did the Cross Achieve?: The Logic of Penal
Substitution," Tyndale Bulletin 25 (1974): p.
17.
ii. Dictionary of the
New Testament Theology,
s.v. "anti," appendix, by M. J. Harris
(1978), 3:1179.
iii. Ibid., s.v. "huper,"
by M. J. Harris (1978), 3:1196; A Greek-English
Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early
Christian Literature, trans. William F. Arndt
and F. Wilbur Gingrich, 4th
rev. ed., s.v. "huper," pp. 846-7.
iv. Ibid., 3:1197.
v. Bruce K. Waltke,
"The Theological Significations of Anti and
Huper in the New Testament," Th.D. dissertation
(Dallas Theological Seminary, 1958), 2:295-305