The issue concerning the nature of justification in Paul’s letters must necessarily remain inconclusive (as indeed it is, all fussing and fuming and strutting aside) uhtil the nature of “the righteousness of God” is properly identified and clarified as premial instead of penal in most of his key usages, and therefore as linked solely to Christ’s resurrection and not to his crucifixion at all. Hence, treating the so-called “doctrine” of justification is premature until the nature of the “atonement” (protective cover) is correctly grasped. Regrettably, the atonement has been erroneously construed as the exhausting of God’s wrath penally on Christ at the cross in order to fulfill punitive justice. But if that were what Paul meant by “the righteousness of God,” then “justification” would necessarily get twisted accordingly, and Christ’s resurrection reduced to a rubber stamp. But if God’s righteousness is understood by Paul to be His doing justice to Jesus BY raising him from the dead AND exalting him over his murderers as Lord of all, despite their fatal abuses, THEN THE CROSS MUST BE REDUCED TO THE MERE APPARATUS OF SHAMEFUL EXECUTION IT WAS DESIGNED TO BE!
What’s more THERE IS NO “THEOLOGY” OF THE CROSS IN SCRIPTURE, IN ANY MEANINGFUL SOTERIOLOGICAL SENSE AT ALL. To be sure, Jesus taught us to take up our cross daily and follow him in bearing the hatred, affliction, and persecution of the world, i.e., its sins against us, in expectation that God will turn those evils to the good and our shame to eventual glory, even as He did for our Master Jesus Christ when he finally executes his premial justice on our behalf in his own good time. But this is a far cry from what penal substitution theologians have made of the cross! They have loaded down that old rugged cross, the emblem of suffering and shame, with mystical soteriological baggage and a halo of powers and glories never so much as hinted at in apostolic Scripture itself! They have turned the cross of Christ into a monstrosity of theological fantasies hardly less grotesque than the bejewelled caricatures that pass for “art” among the less instructed.
Furthermore, THERE IS NO “APOSTOLIC PREACHING OF THE CROSS” IN APOSTOLIC SCRIPTURE (contra. Leon Morris) WHERE, TO THE CONTRARY, THE WEIGHT AND BURDEN OF PROCLAMATION IS ALL ON :
THE RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD…
the morbid bodily condition absolutely guaranteed by the cross! So not the cross, per se, at all, but “the [resurrectional] Explanation of the cross” (1 Corinthians 1:18); not the crucifixion, but Christ the ever-living Lord of glory (1 Corinthians 2:8) “HAVING GOTTEN CRUCIFIED” (past imperfect, middle voice, 1 Corinthians 1:23, 2:2) is what the apostles heralded!
A LIVING CHRIST! A RESURRECTIONARY EXPLANATION!
These are the hallmarks of genuine Gospel teaching.
Therefore, a “theology of the cross” is an absurdity made plausible by giving a penal torque, a punitive spin, a vengeful twist, a vindictive whirl to the Atonement, counter to its native and natural premial bias. The penal spin-doctors have cast a spell of deep sleep from the pulpits of the land so that the walk of faith has degenerated into a sleepwalk of zombies through dull ecclesial and devotional routines instead of a bracing, if risky, adventure on behalf of bringing the healing Kingdom of God into our occupational and residential environs, “as sheep among wolves” (Matthew 10:16; Luke 10:3). This is what can happen, evidently, when we leave our Gospel legacy in the “safekeeping” of professionals, some of whom are certainly (our Lord and his apostles promised us with due warnings!) wolves in sheep’s clothing (Matthew 7:15), “grievous wolves” (Acts 20:29). It’s time to take back the night for the sake of the Day! Saints arise! [8/14/10]
The Premial Atonement 