Penal Substitutionary Atonement: Critique of a Critique (Part 3)
Rather than presenting a Father and Son who are one, Hodge has one member of the Trinity punishing another member of the Trinity.
In my last post, I basically raised the question of whether Green & Baker might be committing a false-cause fallacy, because upon observing similarities between the Western criminal justice system and traditional Evangelical explanations of God's justice, they consistently assert that the traditional Evangelical explanations of God's justice are shaped (and distorted) by the Western criminal justice system.
In the above quote the authors present their readers with a false dilemma: EITHER the Father and Son are one OR the Father punished the Son.
Hodge's presentation of the Covenant of Redemption contains BOTH of the above ideas; of the Covenant of Remdemption, Hodge writes:
There is only one God, one divine Being, to whom all the attributes of divinity belong. But in the Godhead there are three persons, the same in substance, and equal in power and glory. It lies in the nature of personality, that one person is objective to another. If therefore, the Father and the Son are distinct persons the one be the object of the acts of the other. The one may love, address, and commune with the other. The Father may send the Son, may give Him a work to do, and promise Him a recompense. All this is indeed incomprehensible to us, but being clearly taught in Scripture, it must enter into the Christian’s faith.
The Father and the Son are one God AND the Father punished the Son (who willingly took the punishment that we deserved upon Himself): "the punishment that brought our peace was upon Him... it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer" (Isaiah 53:5;10).
Labels: Reformation Theology