Paul Vendredi

Mike Winger claims that the Church Fathers (Christian writers living between AD 100 and 787, primarily in the East Roman or Byzantine Empire) professed penal-substitutionary atonement (PSA). Paul Vendredi refutes this claim using principles that Winger himself enforces. According to Winger, if an idea is considered central to the gospel but cannot be found in the Church Fathers' writings, then it should be rejected. Paul quotes Winger’s mentor, William Lane Craig, who found that the Church Fathers did not have a clear and thorough theory of the atonement. Applying Winger's principles, Paul concludes that PSA should be rejected as a model for Christ’s redemptive work. Paul cites John MacArthur's book, "The Gospel According to Paul," as an example of "spin" in interpreting the Church Fathers' views on the atonement. MacArthur, a staunch defender of PSA, argues that the Church Fathers held a childlike and inadequate understanding of the atonement. However, this perspective is "chronological snobbery," a term used in Protestant apologetics to dismiss the beliefs of pre-modern peoples. Atonement schoolers like Winger and MacArthur also depend upon the fallacy of tautological question. For example, James White mislabels a work by Athanasius as a treatment on the atonement when it is actually a treatment on the work of Christ (“atonement” and “work of Christ” are NOT synonymous). One must not confuse the historical event of the crucifixion with the modern interpretation of it as atonement. Paul then compares the catechisms of Tim Keller, John Calvin, and Cyril of Jerusalem, challenging the expectation that PSA would be a prominent theme in ancient catechisms. However, in the Cyril’s catechetical lecture on repentance and remission of sins, one finds a lack of emphasis on PSA and instead finds language that seems to align more with the Restored-Icon model. The emphasis is on healing and recapitulation rather than infraction and penalty. If PSA is a core tenet of the Gospel, then the heart of the Gospel was lacking in these ancient Eastern catechisms. The same holds for works of systematic theology. Paul compares two modern systematic theologies, one by Wayne Grudem and another by Walter Martin, and notes that while they dedicate around 1.75% and 8.33% of their content to PSA respectively, this is not reflective of the ancient world's approach to systematic theology. Paul opens John Damascene’s "Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith," which dates from the 8th century, and searches for any evidence of PSA. He finds references to the moral-exemplar model, the restored-icon model, and the Christus Victor model, but no mention of anything resembling PSA. Winger’s search for PSA in the Church Fathers fails for three reasons. The first failing is the "fallacy of the Lonely Fact," where Winger assumes that finding a few components of a concept in the Church Fathers' writings proves the entire doctrine. The second failing is Winger's use of anachronistic projections, where he assigns modern meanings to words and phrases used by the Church Fathers. The third failing is Winger's inability to recognize eristic, or debating tactics designed to win arguments rather than seek truth.

In response to Mike Winger’s claim that the Church Fathers taught penal-substitutionary atonement (PSA), Idol Killer host Warren McGrew and his guest Paul Vendredi argue that the Eastern Orthodox Church, which heavily relies on these church fathers, does not teach PSA. To support their argument, they examine Athanasius, one of the cited church fathers, and suggest that Winger may be bringing a modern bias into the interpretation of these ancient texts. Paul refutes the Protestant apologists' claim that Protestantism represents the true teachings of Christ, despite its origin being over 1,500 years after Christ's birth. To defend this claim, Protestant apologists jump onto the timeline at 1517 and look backward, plundering intellectual history for figures they can label as proto-Protestants. One such figure is Thomas Aquinas, who is described as a Protestant-leaning figure due to his rejection of certain Catholic dogmas like the Immaculate Conception. The Protestant strategy continues as they label other figures, like Athanasius, as proto-Protestants despite the historical context and the figures' original religious affiliations. Paul momentarily digresses on how technology has impacted the field of apologetics and the ability to fact-check information. He reminisces about the era of audiotapes and how apologists could lie without consequences, as audiences did not have the means to fact-check on the spot. However, with the advancement of technology and the availability of information online, the “Apologetics Industrial Complex” has been forced to be more honest. Paul also reflects on how technology has enabled easier access to the Church Fathers' works and facilitated dialogue within Christianity. Paul then contrasts the understanding of the crucifixion, asserted by Calvinists Wayne Grudem and Alex Metherell, with that of Athanasius in his book “On the Incarnation.” In this text, Athanasius compares Jesus to a wrestler who must face and overcome the top contenders and must triumph over a public and painful death, to prove his strength and worth. According to Athanasius, Jesus had to die in a public and visible way to remove any doubt about the authenticity of his resurrection. Additionally, Jesus had to defeat an ignominious death to prove his divine power. Athanasius believed that Satan, the prince of the power of the air, was the enemy trying to keep souls from the truth and hindering those who follow it. By dying on the cross, Jesus overthrew Satan and purified the air, making a way for humans to ascend to heaven. Furthermore, Athanasius saw Jesus' crucifixion as an icon of human unity and indivisibility. Jesus' arms outstretched on the cross symbolized his drawing all men unto himself, and his undivided body in death prevented any excuse for dividing the church in the future. Therefore, Athanasius did not view Jesus' crucifixion as a penal-substitutionary atonement, but rather as a demonstration of his divinity, his victory over Satan, and the unity and indivisibility of the church. RC Sproul's description of Jesus on the cross as the "quintessential obscenity" is disputed by the hosts. They find it offensive and unbiblical, as they believe the Father and Son have perfect communion throughout the crucifixion. Indeed, the PSA model creates division within the Trinity.

Warren McGrew and Paul Vendredi address Reverend Mike Winger's claim that John Chrysostom, a Church Father living in the theological golden age of the 4th century, professed penal-substitutionary atonement (PSA). Rev. Winger’s interpreting Chrysostom's phrase "in our stead" fails to recognize that this phrase can be accommodated by multiple working hypotheses. Paul explains that six competing atonement models all use the phrase "died in our stead" or "in our stead," but the meaning varies depending on the model. Only the PSA model interprets those phrases to mean "punished in our stead"--an interpretation proven wrong by four disconfirming data. Winger also errs in assuming that death equals punishment. Warren then introduces Father Panayiotis Papageorgiou, an expert on John Chrysostom, whom he had invited to his show to discuss the Orthodox faith. Papageorgiou, noted for his expertise in John Chrysostom and his translation of the saint's homilies, asserts that Chrysostom believed that God did not give death as a punishment, but rather as a means to stop the line of sinning. This perspective was missed in the Western tradition due to the influence of Augustine. Papageorgiou emphasizes that God is not an angry father, but a loving one who went to great lengths, including dying on the cross, to convince humans of His love. Papageorgiou laments the fragmented theology in the Western Church and its emphasis on various atonement theories, which he believes have diminished the incarnational and resurrection theology of Christianity. While acknowledging Winger's strong argument from Chrysostom's homily on 2 Corinthians 5:21, Paul expresses frustration that Winger did not provide citations for his quotes from Chrysostom, noting the saint's prolific writing and the challenges of finding specific citations in his vast body of work. Paul criticizes Winger for taking an isolating approach to Chrysostom's analysis, suggesting that other Church Fathers, such as Gregory of Nazianzus and Ambrose of Milan, provide better interpretations of the passage. According to Ambrose of Milan, terms like "sin," "curse," and "infirmity" refer to the human condition that Christ assumed in order to heal, not a one-to-one identification with human sin. If Chrysostom taught PSA, one would expect to find consistent references to it throughout Chrysostom's works. Yet when one looks at the saint’s most important work, the Liturgy of John Chrysostom, used in Eastern Orthodox and Byzantine Catholic parishes, one finds no evidence for PSA. The second part of this liturgy involves the transformation of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. According to Eastern Orthodox theology, this is where the congregation mystically enters into the one-time sacrifice of Christ. However, contrary to the PSA model, there is no mention of penalties or substitutions in the anaphora, which initiates the transformation of the elements. Warren notes differences in hymnology between older and newer Protestant traditions, with the older hymns focusing more on redemption, rescue, and deliverance, while the newer hymns lean towards PSA and its punitive language.

Gregory of Nazianzus, revered as an early developer of Christological concepts, stands among the most important Church Fathers in Eastern Orthodoxy. How curious that Mike Winger cites this figure as a proponent of the much later doctrine of penal-substitutionary atonement (PSA)! In this video, Warren McGrew welcomes back Paul Vendredi to refute Winger’s claims about this saint. Gregory did not view the cross as a means of bearing God's wrath or enabling forgiveness. Rather, he saw Christ’s work as an assumption of human nature designed to heal and redeem it. The phrase Gregory used to convey this concept has become legendary in Eastern Orthodoxy and is quoted frequently when discussing the reason for Christ's incarnation and crucifixion. Both at the popular and scholarly levels, Gregory’s turn of phrase is referenced to emphasize that what was not assumed by Christ could not be healed, and what was united to his divinity was saved. Gregory's theology, as expressed in a letter he wrote criticizing a particular heterodox Christology known as Apollinarianism, emphasizes that for Christ to save humanity fully, he must assume and heal in their entirety the nature of what was fallen. Gregory’s idea that what Christ has not assumed he has not healed, concludes with humanity’s apotheosis or divinization. Paul criticizes Winger for not acknowledging this aspect of Gregory's theology. Paul also clarifies that when Gregory refers to Christ as sin and a curse (2 Corinthians 5;21 and Galatians 3;13), it is a metaphor for the Incarnation, not a literal transformation. Paul then returns to Gregory's Theology of the Restored Icon, which posits that mankind was created in God's image but was damaged in a fall provoked by Satan's envy, resulting in the need for restoration. According to Gregory, demons, who envied mankind and could not bear the thought of men attaining to a higher state than they, caused humanity’s exile from the Tree of Life. God's response was to become man, assuming human nature while remaining unchanged, to heal and restore humanity. Paul refers to this concept as the restored-icon model (RIM) which emphasizes the unification of damaged humanity with God's divinity rather than PSA’s ludicrous machinery of penalties, substitutions, and infractions. Paul takes a moment to examine the Christology of Winger’s mentor, William Lane Craig. Craig's perspective on the work of Christ aligns with a wing of the atonement school that deems Christ's life irrelevant to salvation. Notable theologians like Millard Erickson and Lewis Sperry Chafer are speculated to hold or have held this view, while Walter Martin (a famous counter-cultist) and W.O. Vaught (who pastored Bill Clinton) explicitly teach it. Recapitulation is a theory that Christ heals all aspects of humanity and inanimate things by recapitulating their history. The RIM posits that Christ makes healing available to humans, who then cooperate with Him in a lifelong struggle to restore their divine image. The speaker also introduces the converse RIM, which can be found in the writings of the church fathers. This model describes individuals who have the healing of Christ made available to them but choose not to cooperate and instead indulge in their sins. Paul suggests that this idea can be inferred from the first two chapters of Romans, where human beings are described as becoming debased by their sins and ultimately becoming icons of the sin they cherish. In the afterlife, those who have cooperated with Christ experience God's love as heavenly rays, while those who have rejected Christ experience God's love as hellfire.

Idol Killer host Warren McGrew brings Paul Vendredi aboard for this seven-part series examining the seventeen theological ideas underlying the larger doctrine called penal-substitutionary atonement (PSA). Paul begins his examination by defining terms linked to PSA: atonement and propitiation. Atonement means reparation for a wrong or an injury. Propitiation means making a party who is ill-disposed toward us well-disposed by means of payment or bribery. However, as they dive deeper into the topic, the hosts acknowledge the complexity of the issue, as the term “atonement” in theological circles has a broader definition, leading to competing interpretations among Western and Eastern Christians. Not all traditions understand Christ’s death as reparation for a wrong or an injury, as some, like the “Restored-Icon Model,” view Christ’s work as a healing or restorative process. Despite this, all these theories are referred to as “atonement theories,” creating a confusing and chaotic situation where communication becomes challenging. The differences among the traditions notwithstanding, the hosts resolve always to bring the focus back to the common data set; namely, the life, death, and resurrection of Christ. Using the Greek-language Septuagint translation (LXX), Paul shows that human beings were created as God’s icons. However, human beings--as broken icons because of sin--lost their immortality. Church Fathers like Gregory of Nazianzus see this as the reason why the second person of the Trinity became incarnate, restoring the icon by attaching all aspects of humanity to his divinity. The hosts then discuss the origins of PSA in the writings of Augustine and Anselm, two figures revered in Western Christianity. While acknowledging the brilliance of these two men, Paul critiques their soteriology, rejecting PSA while offering the Restored-Icon Model as a more comprehensive explanation of the data. Paul then outlines the 17 ideas that compose PSA: 1. Because Adam is mankind’s federal head, all men are guilty of Adam’s sin (Original Sin) 2. As a result of Original Sin, all mankind are now totally depraved 3. Even infants--innocent of actual sin--are guilty of Original Sin and are therefore totally depraved 4. All sin infinitely offends God because the gravity of a sin depends on the status of the one offended 5. All sin is to be thought of as a debt that mankind owes to God for having robbed him of honor 6. Even infants owe God this debt 7. God instituted the Old-Testament sacrifices because this debt can only be paid with blood 8. God could have cancelled mankind’s debt simply by willing it-- 9. But God is strictly just and cannot forgive a debt without first collecting it from an alternate source 10. Because the Fall was as easy as possible, the atonement for that fall must be as costly and painful as possible 11. The only commodity valuable to recompense God for his offended honor is the shed blood of a god-man 12. So the Son of God becomes incarnate as Jesus of Nazareth so that his human nature can suffer and die as mankind’s substitute 13. God pours out his wrath on the crucified Christ, transferring Christ’s righteousness to mankind; mankind’s wickedness, to Christ 14. The crucified Christ becomes a literal curse and the embodiment of sin 15. His eyes too holy to look upon sin, God turns his back on Christ, abandoning him 16. As the perfect, unblemished sacrifice, Christ satisfies God’s wrath against sin once and for all, thereby obviating any further need for blood sacrifices 17. The death of Christ ransoms mankind from the wrath of God

This is the first of two lectures critiquing the sixteenth claim in the composite model of atonement. This sixteenth claim states: “As the perfect unblemished offering, Christ satisfies God’s wrath against sin once and for all, thereby obviating any further need for blood sacrifice.” This claim creates decidedly less furor than the model’s other claims for the simple fact that this theology seems to be held by everyone in the Christian world. Even respected thinkers within Eastern Orthodoxy espouse this claim. The professors of this theology fail to reckon with the falsity of the two presuppositions atop which it rests. The first of these wrong ideas asserts that all of the Old-Testament sacrifices prefigure Christ. In point of fact, only the Passover lamb prefigures Christ. The sacrifices instituted after Israel’s apostasy with the Golden Calf have no bearing on Christ and the New-Testament Church whatsoever, given that this “second legislation” was purely ad hoc and punitive. The second of these ideas wrongly asserts that Christ, as the Paschal Lamb, represents the fulfilment of the young goat slain as a sin offering on the Day of Atonement. The obvious problem is that a lamb is a young SHEEP; a young goat is a KID. Christ is the Lamb of God (John 1:29), not the “Kid of God!” Additionally, the offering of the first Passover lamb is not a sacrifice of atonement; rather, it is a sacrifice designed to destroy heathen gods. The New Testament ascribes precisely the same purpose to Christ’s incarnation: “For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil” (1 John 3:8). This lecture draws heavily from the Epistle to the Hebrews and from an anonymous work of the third century AD called The Apostolic Constitutions. (For the other podcasts in this series, go to www.paulvendredi.com.)

RESOLUTION: The Bible Teaches that God Justifies a Sinner by Means of the Sinner's Faith Alone. No Works, Including Works of The Law, Play Any Role in The Sinner's Justification. AFFIRMATIVE: Joshua E Smith NEGATIVE: Paul Vendredi DATE RECORDED: 09/09/17 LENGTH: 90 minutes For the full debate, go to www.paulvendredi.com.

RESOLUTION: Vicarious Atonement Is a Pagan Construct and Not a Biblical Teaching. Therefore, Vicarious Atonement Should Be Rejected by Christians. AFFIRMATIVE: Paul Vendredi NEGATIVE: Joshua E Smith DATE RECORDED: 07/08/17 LENGTH: 90 minutes For the full debate, go to www.paulvendredi.com.

RESOLUTION: Western Christians Have Wrongly Applied the Label ‘Atonement’ to Christ’s Work on the Cross. AFFIRMATIVE: Paul Vendredi NEGATIVE: Kevin Hughes DATE RECORDED: 03/18/17 LENGTH: 60 minutes For the full debate, go to www.paulvendredi.com.

RESOLUTION: The Restored-Icon Model Is the Right Understanding of Christ’s Death. AFFIRMATIVE: Paul Vendredi NEGATIVE: Kevin Hughes DATE RECORDED: 01/07/17 LENGTH: 30 minutes For the full debate, go to www.paulvendredi.com.

RESOLUTION: Vicarious Atonement Is the Right Understanding of Christ’s Death. AFFIRMATIVE: Kevin Hughes NEGATIVE: Paul Vendredi DATE RECORDED: 12/03/16 LENGTH: 30 minutes For the full debate, go to www.paulvendredi.com.

RESOLUTION: 1. The Bible Teaches that Adam Is Mankind's Federal Head; that Is to Say, Adam Is the Official Representative of All Human Beings. 2. The Necessary Inference from this Is that All Human Beings Inherit Not Simply the Consequences of Adam's Sin in the Garden of Eden, but Also the Guilt. 3. The Only Human Being Not to Inherit the Consequences and Guilt of Adam’s Sin Is Christ. AFFIRMATIVE: Joshua E Smith NEGATIVE: Paul Vendredi DATE RECORDED: 10/13/18 LENGTH: 90 minutes For the full debate, go to www.paulvendredi.com.

RESOLUTION: The Entire Old-Testament Sacrificial System Prefigures Christ and Is Fulfilled in Christ. AFFIRMATIVE: Kevin Hughes NEGATIVE: Paul Vendredi DATE RECORDED: 04/29/17 LENGTH: 60 minutes For the full debate, go to www.paulvendredi.com.

RESOLUTION: God Instituted the Old-Testament Sacrificial System Because Our Debt to Him Must Be Paid in Blood. AFFIRMATIVE: Kevin Hughes NEGATIVE: Paul Vendredi DATE RECORDED: 04/01/17 LENGTH: 60 minutes For the full debate, go to www.paulvendredi.com.