Negative Rebuttal - Penal Substitution Debate

Penal Substitution Debate – Negative Rebuttal Essay

By Nick

1) I will first deal with the Affirmative Constructive Essay. It seems to me that in that essay my opponent (this term I use in the context of a formal debate, not in the pejorative sense) was more focused on proving the Biblical truth that atonement was necessary, rather than the specific doctrine of Penal Substitution. Because of this, most of the essay was written broadly enough that I as a Catholic would find little to object to. Given this, I will now call attention to the few parts I feel do require some commentary.

Penal Substitution Debate - Affirmative Rebuttal Essay

Penal Substitution Debate - Affirmative Rebuttal Essay

By Turretin Fan

Matthew 20:28 Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

Penal Substitution Debate - Affirmative Constructive Essay

--> Penal Substitution Debate - Affirmative Constructive Essay
By Turretin Fan
Isaiah 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Penal Substitution Debate - Negative Constructive Essay

Penal Substitution Debate

Negative Constructive Essay

By Nick

Penal Substitution is grounded on the Protestant notion that justification is a legal event. As such, God must deal with sin in a legal manner, which (to Protestants) means sin cannot go unpunished without violating the very integrity of God's Holiness and Justice. God's Wrath (due to sin) must be legally satisfied (i.e. sin cannot go unpunished) in order for sinful man to be forgiven and justified. The “penal” aspect consists of both the temporal and eternal punishments due to sin which are to be punished in the guilty party, while the “substitution” aspect consists in the sinner's guilt being imputed (transferred) to the account of another, a substitute, in this case Jesus Christ, who then receives the punishment the sinner deserved. The Resolution of this debate sums up this concept: God imputed the guilt of the sins of the elect to Christ. In other words, the Wrath the elect deserved for their sins was instead poured out by the Father onto Jesus.

Penal Substitution (Atonement) Debate!

I am pleased to announce that a Reformed Protestant Apologist named "Turretin Fan" has agreed to debate me on a very important theological issue: The Atonement.
The classical Protestant view of the Atonement is popularly termed "penal substitution" (penal meaning punishment), a teaching which I as a Catholic believe is an incorrect view of the Atonement (and thus not taught in Scripture).

The agreed upon resolution, schedule and rules for the debate are as follows:

Resolved: God imputed the guilt of the sins of the elect to Christ.
Affirmed: Turretin Fan
Denied: Nicholas E. (Nick)

Debate Start: Jan 4.

1. Affirmative Constructive Essay and Negative Constructive Essay - Due Jan 18.

2. Affirmative Rebuttal Essay - Due Feb 1.
3. Negative Rebuttal Essay - Due Feb 15.
4. Affirmative Cross-Examination Questions to the Negative - Due Mar 1.
5. Negative Cross-Examination Answers and Negative Cross-Examination Questions to the Affirmative - Due Mar 15.
6. Affirmative Cross-Examination Answers to the Negative - Due Mar 29.

7. Negative Concluding Essay - Due April 12.
8. Affirmative Concluding Essay- Due April 26.

Debate End: April 26.

All Essays are 5k words maximum, while each of the 5 Questions are 1k words maximum. The word limits include any citations and quotes.

Rules:
(1) Each person will post their own essays on their own blog. The opponent can then cut & paste the opposing response.
http://catholicnick.blogspot.com/
http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/

(2) Comment boxes for our Essays will be closed.

(3) Citing church documents, theologians, and other such references is allowed, though the opponent is not necessarily bound to defend any claims other than his own.

(4) Formatting essay text (ie size, bold, underline, italics, etc) is allowed.