The Deity of Jesus did not disqualify him from solidarity with his fellow humans for the sake of their salvation, because PREMIAL RESTITUTION renders invalid that objection, which rests on the false assumption of PENAL SATISFACTION.

God ordained the SURRENDER (paradosis) of His beloved Son to the murderous Judeans, but He did not ordain their MURDER itself.  He well knew, as did Jesus, what would ensue.  Yet lest we sinful human beings nurture any doubts about it….  In God’s strategy, it must occur that His Son get slain under such adverse circumstances in order to demonstrate and confirm 1) Christ’s SINLESS, FAITHFUL OBEDIENCE, 2) mankind’s SINFUL HATRED OF SUCH UPRIGHTNESS, and 3) God’s SUPERABUNDANT REWARDING JUSTICE/UPRIGHTNESS on behalf of the Crucified One via RESURRECTION AND BEYOND, even in the face of such lethal opposition.  [10/18/10; 2/23/22]

The Deity of Jesus did not prevent or disqualify him from securing the salvation of humanity, because his unique work as Savior had nothing to do with “satisfying the penal justice of God’s wrath, in our place,” in which case his Deity (or perhaps even simply his extraordinary enduement with the Holy Spirit after his baptism) would seem to have rendered him ineligible as a human being to win our salvation (as Faustus Socinus has correctly argued, in my judgment).  The reason why Christ did remain eligible, however, is that his Deity as son rendered him separable (in principle) from his Father, which status would not in itself disallow bodily death, although nor would it prejudice his unprecedented bodily return to life!  When the Son was born a human being at Bethlehem, he became a mortal in principle, i.e., capable of dying as his fellow humans die.  Therefore, he became eligible by virtue of his solidarity with human bodily mortality, his Deity notwithstanding (contrary to the unitarian assumption of Socinus).

Accordingly, Christ’s role in salvation was achieved not by “satisfying God’s penal justice” at all, but by winning His PREMIAL (i.e., rewarding) JUSTICE for the sake of his human brethren.  For this work he indeed needed a superior endowment of Holy Spirit, which he did receive at his baptism.  He had qualified for this endowment by virtue of his being the Word of God in human flesh, faithful and obedient in all things, i.e., without sin.  The extra portion of Holy Spirit enabled him to fulfill the higher requirements of his public teaching and healing ministry to Israel, and especially to remain faithful through an unjust, humiliating, and agonizing death by crucifixion.  But this death was not in any sense a penalty, punishment, or condemnation by God on behalf of our sins, which, as just noted, would have disqualified him from the solidarity necessary to accomplish human salvation.  Much rather, his death, IN VIEW OF HIS PERFECT HUMAN OBEDIENCE TO GOD, was profoundly UNJUST and FOR THAT REASON was DECISIVELY REVERSED BY THE VERDICT AND POWER OF GOD’S JUSTICE, PREMIALLY EXECUTED FOR HIS BENEFIT VIA RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD.  The result was a GLORIFIED HUMAN BODY FOR JESUS, NOW PUBLICLY SPECIFIED AS LORD AND MESSIAH.

Therefore, in terms of this aspect of divine justice, the help Jesus received from God, whether as His only-begotten/born Son or as specially endowed with the Holy Spirit at his baptism, could not give him an “UNFAIR ADVANTAGE” since the central issue is no longer that of “FAIR, TRULY HUMAN PAYMENT OF THE PENALTY FOR SIN(S)” ON BEHALF OF OTHERS/SINNERS at all, but of a PERFECTLY SINLESS SACRIFICE OF A TRUE HUMAN BEING AT THE HANDS OF VICIOUS HUMAN BEINGS, BEFORE THE WATCHFUL EYE OF GOD, IN EXPECTATION OF HIS RESTORATIVE JUSTICE.  And since in terms of this facet of God’s justice no “SUBSTITUTION” or “VICARIOUS EXCHANGE” of PENALTY is entailed, there is no inherent difficulty in RENDERING THE RIGHTFUL REWARD DIRECTLY TO ITS PROPER RECIPIENT, JESUS HIMSELF.  Naturally, he was free and authorized to disburse his own judicial award to his fellow human beings in any manner he pleased.  And since FAITH pleases God and is within reach of any human being within hearing of the Gospel, regardless of their ineradicable mortal weakness and consequent sinfulness, this is the perfect choice of criterion for channeling salvation fairly.

This all implies that Christ’s inherent Deity should not have been perceived as a threat to the integrity and fairness (“justice” in its true sense, according to Socinus) of his atonement in the eyes of Socinus and his followers.  A PREMIAL atonement gives Christ no unfair (i.e., unjust), inequitable advantage, seeing as the issue is not one of HOW TO SUSTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF A PENAL SANCTION BY ONE WHO IS [“ALLEGED TO BE,” as Socinus would characterize the orthodox claim] MORE THAN MERELY HUMAN, ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHER HUMAN BEINGS (or even just “the elect”) AS THEIR SUBSTITUTE BEFORE GOD AND HIS ABSOLUTE (PENAL) JUSTICE, but rather HOW TO FAIRLY WIN A SUFFICIENT JUDICIAL AWARD TO RANSOM THE WHOLE WORLD OF SINFUL HUMANITY OUT OF THE GRIP AND FEAR OF DEATH AND HENCE OF SATAN AND SIN AS WELL.  The problematics of the two faces of JUSTICE are very different.  The power of the Atonement lies exclusively with the PREMIAL facet, and not at all with the PENAL one.  How different the history of Christianity might have been if all sides had seen this luminous, conciliatory truth! Will our future be different?  Help us, oh God!  [10/19/10; 2/24/22; 3/11/22]

Jesus did not “shed his blood.”

JESUS DID NOT “SHED HIS BLOOD,” IT WAS SHED FOR HIM! Yes, he obediently submitted himself to this official, public, cruel, prolonged, and incredibly unjust execution, but HE DIDN’T SHED IT, NOR DO THE SCRIPTURES TEACH THAT HE DID. This notion is a grotesque impulse and reflex of a penal substitutionary misrepresentation of the Gospel. [8/17/08] Getting the details of the Story straight is half the battle.

There’s a leering irony in the fact that, for all their vociferous denials that the Gospel is “rational” (out of overreaction to Socinianism), yet Evangelicals indulge in elaborate, if tortured, rationalizations to establish and justify it! If you happen to believe for any reason that the Gospel is truly and appealingly “rational,” you are liable to be labeled a “Socinian,” “Unitarian,” “anti-trinitarian,” “rationalist,” “Liberal,” or worse—a “non-Evangelical”! Okay, maybe that’s not so bad after all, considering the company you start keeping when you’re jealous over the “Evangelical” tag. [8/19/08]

If it is possible to conceive of a penal justice entirely bereft of reparative qualities, as evidently it is (on the prevalent view), then why would a purely reparative justice be so inconceivable—a justice entirely lacking in punitive qualities, focused on restoring to victims of crime what they lost? This is the challenge before us at our moment in history. The apostolic Proclamation of salvation through the work of God in the “Crossurrection” has been distorted and contorted beyond a Wholesome-Spirited rationality and hence beyond credibility. It sinks under a thousand qualifications. Certainly someone will come along and propose a mediating “combination” of the two, but I would hold out for a clear and unconfused, unmixed distinction between the two, plus an emphatic claim of exclusive evangelical authenticity for the reparative, in connection to the Atonement. [8/30/08]

The denunciatory attitude of “penal substitutionary” advocates is too consistent and widespread not to be a natural reflex of the erroneous doctrine itself. The theory breeds arrogance, smugness, judgmentalism, animosity, and self-righteousness (oddly ironic!). These evil qualities can be seen throughout the history it traverses (too short to be apostolic, too long to be merely adventitious). The punitive and peremptory manner of its devotees is plowed into every new generation, making them sometimes twice as fit for gehenna as their mentors.  Brethren, this ought not to be!

May resurrectionary graciousness overtake this aberration and swallow up its disciples for the cause of reparative justice instead. [9/02/08] Then may they teach their teachers a lesson!

“And to you, O Yahweh, belongs kindness, For You Yourself shall pay each man according to his deeds.” —Psalm 62:12

This, THIS, for Heaven’s sake, is what was happening at the Resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ! THAT SUNDAY WAS PAYDAY for Jesus! On that glorious day he started to get paid back for his lifelong faithfulness to the Covenant with his Father. THE CROSS WAS ONLY THE LAST STRAW—THE ONE THAT BROKE THE DRAGON’S BACK! Even so, the Resurrection was a mere “advance” on Christ’s full paycheck, which came after his exaltation to Heaven.

We must understand our own individual salvations as comprehended within his PAY PACKAGE! He suffered greater abuse in order to swell his PAY…ON OUR BEHALF, ALL THE GREATER! We’ve gotta get this! [9/02/08]