Does the Practice of Indulgences Forgive Sins? Rome's Compromise of the Cross of Jesus

The papal encyclical Indulgentiarum Doctrina by Pope Paul VI states that indulgences expiates sin,

2. It is a divinely revealed truth that sins bring punishments inflicted by God's sanctity and justice. These must be expiated either on this earth through the sorrows, miseries and calamities of this life and above all through death,³ or else in the life beyond through fire and torments or "purifying" punishments.⁴ Therefore it has always been the conviction of the faithful that the paths of evil are fraught with many stumbling blocks and bring adversities, bitterness and harm to those who follow them.⁵

The more they have been immersed in the fervor of charity, the more they have imitated Christ in His sufferings, carrying their crosses in expiation for their own sins and those of others, certain that they could help their brothers to obtain salvation from God the Father of mercies.¹⁷ This is the very ancient dogma of the Communion of the Saints,¹⁸ whereby the life of each individual son of God in Christ and through Christ is joined by a wonderful link to the life of all his other Christian brothers in the supernatural unity of the Mystical Body of Christ till, as it were, a single mystical person is formed.1

Thus is explained the "treasury of the Church"²⁰ which should certainly not be imagined as the sum total of material goods accumulated in the course of the centuries, but the infinite and inexhaustible value the expiation and the merits of Christ Our Lord have before God, offered as they were so that all of mankind could be set free from sin and attain communion with the Father. It is Christ the Redeemer Himself in whom the satisfactions and merits of His redemption exist and find their force.²¹ This treasury also includes the truly immense, unfathomable and ever pristine value before God of the prayers and good works of the Blessed Virgin Mary and all the saints, who following in the footsteps of Christ the Lord and by His grace have sanctified their lives and fulfilled the mission entrusted to them by the Father. Thus while attaining their own salvation, they have also cooperated in the salvation of their brothers in the unity of the Mystical Body.

The use of indulgences, which spread gradually, became a very evident fact in the history of the Church when the Roman Pontiffs decreed that certain works useful to the common good of the Church "could replace all penitential practices"³⁴ and that the faithful who were "truly repentant and had confessed their sins" and performed such works were granted "by the mercy of Almighty God and . . . trusting in the merits and the authority of His Apostles" and 'by virtue of the fullness of the apostolic power', not only full and abundant forgiveness, but the most complete forgiveness for their sins possible."³⁵

The bottom line question is: who alone can expiate sin?  It is Christ alone who atones, forgives, and expiates the sins of God's people.  Sins are not truly expiated through Rome's practice of indulgences.  It is a compromise of the expiation of the crucified Savior!

Hebrews 2:17 KJV Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

Indulgences do not forgive sin as Rome teaches.  Rather only the Cross of Jesus Christ can pardon sin.  He alone made reconciliation and atonement and expiation for God's people!  If you want to stand in matchless robes of divine righteousness, look to Christ alone as the sole covering of a sinner!  A mixture of "righteousness" of the Virgin Mary, the saints and Jesus will not stand before a holy God.  You need the wholly untainted and divine and exclusive righteousness of the matchless Lamb of God alone.

How Should We View the Roman Teaching of the Roman Eucharist in light of the Cross of the Divine Scriptures?

J.C. Ryle one wrote on the Cross,

This is no mere question of controversy; this is not one of those points on which men may agree to differ, and feel that differences will not shut them out of heaven. A man must be right on this subject, or he is lost forever. Heaven or hell, happiness or misery, life or death, blessing or cursing in the last day – all hinges on the answer to this question: “What do you think about the cross of Christ?"  (J.C. Ryle, The Cross: A Call to the Fundamentals of Religion).

We must never add to the Cross of Jesus Christ.  The Roman teaching of the Eucharist adds to the divine completeness of the Cross of Jesus our Savior and God.  The Cross, not the Roman Host, is the way God deals with sinners through His alone propitiation and expiation for sins of God's elect people.

The Bible teaches that the biblical Eucharist is a remembrance of the literal body and blood of Jesus.  The Bible teaches a "real presence" of the Eucharist through the divine omnipresence and sacredness of the Word that is not the same as the Roman Eucharist.  That is, it is a real spiritual memorial because of the all-sufficient atonement and shed blood of our Savior.  It is a sacred and blessed meal because of the divine testimony of the divine Word.  The bodily resurrection of Jesus verifies that the Eucharist is a true spiritual remembrance of the all-agonizing atonement of our only Redeemer for the sins of God's people.  The Last Supper provides the Christian with nourishment, strength, hope and joy.  We are reminded that are sins are completely forgiven: past, present and future!  We are able to fellowship with the people of God and with Christ.  The very heart of holy communion is a spiritual fellowship with our Savior.  We ought to never cherish sins in our hearts when partaking of communion.  There ought to be spiritual examination before we partake of the Lord's spiritual body and blood.  For Jonathan Edwards wrote,

We ought carefully and with the utmost seriousness and consideration attend the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper: this was appointed for this end, to draw forth longings of our souls toward Jesus Christ. Here are the glorious objects of spiritual desire by visible signs represented to our view. We have Christ evidently set forth crucified…. Here we have that spiritual meat and drink represented and offered to excite our hunger and thirst; here we have all that spiritual feast represented which God has provided for poor souls; and here we may hope in some measure to have our longing souls satisfied in this world by the gracious communications of the Spirit of God.  (Jonathan Edwards Sacrament Sermon on Canticles 5:1 (circa 1729), p. 14).

We see that the biblical Eucharist is where the longing soul thirsts for Jesus Christ.  The hope of our souls is represented in the bread and wine of the Last Supper.  What is the reformed perspective on the Last Supper?  For the London Baptist Confession states,

Chapter 30: Of the Lord's Supper
1._____ The supper of the Lord Jesus was instituted by him the same night wherein he was betrayed, to be observed in his churches, unto the end of the world, for the perpetual remembrance, and shewing forth the sacrifice of himself in his death, confirmation of the faith of believers in all the benefits thereof, their spiritual nourishment, and growth in him, their further engagement in, and to all duties which they owe to him; and to be a bond and pledge of their communion with him, and with each other.
( 1 Corinthians 11:23-26; 1 Corinthians 10:16, 17,21 ) 2._____ In this ordinance Christ is not offered up to his Father, nor any real sacrifice made at all for remission of sin of the quick or dead, but only a memorial of that one offering up of himself by himself upon the cross, once for all; and a spiritual oblation of all possible praise unto God for the same. So that the popish sacrifice of the mass, as they call it, is most abominable, injurious to Christ's own sacrifice the alone propitiation for all the sins of the elect.
( Hebrews 9:25, 26, 28; 1 Corinthians 11:24; Matthew 26:26, 27 )
3._____ The Lord Jesus hath, in this ordinance, appointed his ministers to pray, and bless the elements of bread and wine, and thereby to set them apart from a common to a holy use, and to take and break the bread; to take the cup, and, they communicating also themselves, to give both to the communicants.
( 1 Corinthians 11:23-26, etc. )
4._____ The denial of the cup to the people, worshipping the elements, the lifting them up, or carrying them about for adoration, and reserving them for any pretended religious use, are all contrary to the nature of this ordinance, and to the institution of Christ.
( Matthew 26:26-28; Matthew 15:9; Exodus 20:4, 5 )
5._____ The outward elements in this ordinance, duly set apart to the use ordained by Christ, have such relation to him crucified, as that truly, although in terms used figuratively, they are sometimes called by the names of the things they represent, to wit, the body and blood of Christ, albeit, in substance and nature, they still remain truly and only bread and wine, as they were before.
( 1 Corinthians 11:27; 1 Corinthians 11:26-28 )
6._____ That doctrine which maintains a change of the substance of bread and wine, into the substance of Christ's body and blood, commonly called transubstantiation, by consecration of a priest, or by any other way, is repugnant not to Scripture alone, but even to common sense and reason, overthroweth the nature of the ordinance, and hath been, and is, the cause of manifold superstitions, yea, of gross idolatries.
( Acts 3:21; Luke 14:6, 39; 1 Corinthians 11:24, 25 )
7._____ Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements in this ordinance, do then also inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally, but spiritually receive, and feed upon Christ crucified, and all the benefits of his death; the body and blood of Christ being then not corporally or carnally, but spiritually present to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses.
( 1 Corinthians 10:16; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 )
8._____ All ignorant and ungodly persons, as they are unfit to enjoy communion with Christ, so are they unworthy of the Lord's table, and cannot, without great sin against him, while they remain such, partake of these holy mysteries, or be admitted thereunto; yea, whosoever shall receive unworthily, are guilty of the body and blood of the Lord, eating and drinking judgment to themselves.
( 2 Corinthians 6:14, 15; 1 Corinthians 11:29; Matthew 7:6 )

And the Westminster Larger Catechism states,

Q. 168. What is the Lord’s supper?
A. The Lord’s supper is a sacrament of the New Testament,[1077] wherein, by giving and receiving bread and wine according to the appointment of Jesus Christ, his death is showed forth; and they that worthily communicate feed upon his body and blood, to their spiritual nourishment and growth in grace;[1078] have their union and communion with him confirmed;[1079] testify and renew their thankfulness,[1080] and engagement to God,[1081] and their mutual love and fellowship each with the other, as members of the same mystical body.[1082]
Q. 169. How hath Christ appointed bread and wine to be given and received in the sacrament of the Lord’s supper?
A. Christ hath appointed the ministers of his Word, in the administration of this sacrament of the Lord’s supper, to set apart the bread and wine from common use, by the word of institution, thanksgiving, and prayer; to take and break the bread, and to give both the bread and the wine to the communicants: who are, by the same appointment, to take and eat the bread, and to drink the wine, in thankful remembrance that the body of Christ was broken and given, and his blood shed, for them.[1083]
Q. 170. How do they that worthily communicate in the Lord’s supper feed upon the body and blood of Christ therein?
A. As the body and blood of Christ are not corporally or carnally present in, with, or under the bread and wine in the Lord’s supper,[1084] and yet are spiritually present to the faith of the receiver, no less truly and really than the elements themselves are to their outward senses;[1085] so they that worthily communicate in the sacrament of the Lord’s supper, do therein feed upon the body and blood of Christ, not after a corporal and carnal, but in a spiritual manner; yet truly and really,[1086] while by faith they receive and apply unto themselves Christ crucified, and all the benefits of his death.[1087]
Q. 171. How are they that receive the sacrament of the Lord’s supper to prepare themselves before they come unto it?
A. They that receive the sacrament of the Lord’s supper are, before they come, to prepare themselves thereunto, by examining themselves[1088] of their being in Christ,[1089] of their sins and wants;[1090] of the truth and measure of their knowledge,[1091] faith,[1092] repentance;[1093] love to God and the brethren,[1094] charity to all men,[1095] forgiving those that have done them wrong;[1096] of their desires after Christ,[1097] and of their new obedience;[1098] and by renewing the exercise of these graces,[1099] by serious meditation,[1100] and fervent prayer.[1101]
Q. 172. May one who doubteth of his being in Christ, or of his due preparation, come to the Lord’s supper?
A. One who doubteth of his being in Christ, or of his due preparation to the sacrament of the Lord’s supper, may have true interest in Christ, though he be not yet assured thereof;[1102] and in God’s account hath it, if he be duly affected with the apprehension of the want of it,[1103] and unfeignedly desires to be found in Christ,[1104] and to depart from iniquity:[1105] in which case (because promises are made, and this sacrament is appointed, for the relief even of weak and doubting Christians[1106]) he is to bewail his unbelief,[1107] and labor to have his doubts resolved;[1108] and, so doing, he may and ought to come to the Lord’s supper, that he may be further strengthened.[1109]
Q. 173. May any who profess the faith, and desire to come to the Lord’s supper, be kept from it?
A. Such as are found to be ignorant or scandalous, notwithstanding their profession of the faith, and desire to come to the Lord’s supper, may and ought to be kept from that sacrament, by the power which Christ hath left in his church,[1110] until they receive instruction, and manifest their reformation.[1111]
Q. 174. What is required of them that receive the sacrament of the Lord’s supper in the time of the administration of it?
A. It is required of them that receive the sacrament of the Lord’s supper, that, during the time of the administration of it, with all holy reverence and attention they wait upon God in that ordinance,[1112] diligently observe the sacramental elements and actions,[1113] heedfully discern the Lord’s body,[1114] and affectionately meditate on his death and sufferings,[1115] and thereby stir up themselves to a vigorous exercise of their graces;[1116] in judging themselves,[1117] and sorrowing for sin;[1118] in earnest hungering and thirsting after Christ,[1119] feeding on him by faith,[1120] receiving of his fullness,[1121] trusting in his merits,[1122] rejoicing in his love,[1123] giving thanks for his grace;[1124] in renewing of their covenant with God,[1125] and love to all the saints.[1126]
Q. 175. What is the duty of Christians, after they have received the sacrament of the Lord’s supper?
A. The duty of Christians, after they have received the sacrament of the Lord’s supper, is seriously to consider how they have behaved themselves therein, and with what success;[1127] if they find quickening and comfort, to bless God for it,[1128] beg the continuance of it,[1129] watch against relapses,[1130] fulfill their vows,[1131] and encourage themselves to a frequent attendance on that ordinance:[1132] but if they find no present benefit, more exactly to review their preparation to, and carriage at, the sacrament;[1133] in both which, if they can approve themselves to God and their own consciences, they are to wait for the fruit of it in due time:[1134] but, if they see they have failed in either, they are to be humbled,[1135] and to attend upon it afterwards with more care and diligence.[1136]

A Puritan Catechism says,

Q. What is required to the worthy receiving of the Lord's Supper? A. It is required of them who would worthily partake of the Lord's Supper, that they examine themselves of their knowledge to discern the Lord's body (1 Cor. 11:28-29), of their faith to feed upon him (2 Cor. 13:5), of their repentance (1 Cor. 11:31), love (1 Cor. 11:18-20), and new obedience, (1 Cor. 5:8) lest coming unworthily, they eat and drink judgment to themselves (1 Cor. 11:27-29).

---

Q. What is meant by the words, "until he come," which are used by the apostle Paul in reference to the Lord's Supper? A. They plainly teach us that our Lord Jesus Christ will come a second time; which is the joy and hope of all believers (Acts 1:11 1 Thess. 4:16).

We have set forth the Bible's view of the Last Supper. Hence we must ask, what are the original sources for the Roman teaching for the Roman holy communion?   We will see that Rome teaches a vastly different understanding of the Eucharist.

The Council of Trent states the following things about the Eucharist that are unbiblical,

Session XXII: Doctrine on the Sacrifice of the Mass
Chapter I: On the Institution of the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass
Foreasmuch as, under the former Testament, according to the testimony of the Apostle Paul, there was no perfection, because of the weakness of the Levitical priesthood; there was need, God, the Father of mercies, so ordaining, that another priest should rise, according to the order of Melchisedech, our Lord Jesus Christ, who might consummate, and lead to what is perfect, as many as were to be sanctified. He, therefore, our God and Lord, though he was about to offer himself once on the altar of the cross unto God the Father, by means of his death, there to operate an eternal redemption; nevertheless, because that his priesthood was not to be extinguished by his death, in the Last Supper, on the night in which he was betrayed,—that he might leave, to his own beloved Spouse the Church, a visible sacrifice, such as the nature of man requires, whereby that bloody sacrifice, once to be accomplished on the cross, might be represented, and the memory thereof remain even unto the end of the world, and its salutary virtue be applied to the remission of those sins which we daily commit,—declaring himself constituted a priest forever, according to the order of Melchisedech, he offered up to God the Father his own body and blood under the species of bread and wine; and, under the symbols of those same things, he delivered [his own body and blood] to be received by his apostles, whom he then constituted priests of the New Testament; and by those words, Do this in commemoration of me, he commanded them and their successors in the priesthood to offer (them); even as the Catholic Church has always understood and taught.
Chapter II: That the Sacrifice of the Mass is Propitiatory, Both for the Living and the Dead.
For inasmuch as in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the mass is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner the same Christ who once offered himself in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross; the holy council teaches that this is truly propitiatory, and that if we, contrite and penitent, with sincere heart and upright faith, with fear and reverence, draw nigh to God, we obtain mercy and find grace in seasonable aid. For, appeased by this sacrifice, the Lord grants the grace and gift of penitence, and pardons even the gravest crimes and sins. For the victim is one and the same, the same now offering by the ministry of priests who then offered Himself on the cross, the manner alone of offering being different. The fruits of that bloody sacrifice, it is well understood, are received most abundantly through this unbloody one, so far is the latter from derogating in any way from the former. Wherefore, according to the tradition of the Apostles, it is rightly offered not only for the sins, punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities of the faithful who are living, but also for those who are departed in Christ but not as yet fully purified.
Canon I. If any one saith, that in the mass a true and proper sacrifice is not offered to God; or, that to be offered is nothing else but that Christ is given us to eat: let him be anathema.
Canon II. If any one saith, that by those words, Do this for the commemoration of me (Luke xxii. 19), Christ did not institute the apostles priests; or, did not ordain that they and other priests should offer his own body and blood: let him be anathema.
Canon III. If any one saith, that the sacrifice of the mass is only a sacrifice of praise and of thanksgiving; or, that it is a bare commemoration of the sacrifice consummated on the cross, but not a propitiatory sacrifice; or, that it profits him only who receives; and that it ought not to be offered for the living and the dead for sins, pains, satisfactions, and other necessities: let him be anathema.
Canon V. If any one saith, that it is an imposture to celebrate masses in honor of the saints, and for obtaining their intercession with God, as the Church intends: let him be anathema.
Canon VI. If any one saith, that the canon of the mass contains errors, and is therefore to be abrogated: let him be anathema (The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, in Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1919 ed.), pp. 176-180, 184-185).

This is merely a taste of what Rome teaches because there are more primary sources that say the same thing.  The Bible teaches that Christ can never die again and there is no need to offer further sacrifices (Revelation 1:18 cf. Hebrews 10:18).  Furthermore, in Hebrews 9:26 and 10:10 the divine Word clearly says that Jesus' sacrifice is once-and-for-all.  

The Roman Eucahrist: What Does Vatican II Say?

Vatican II wrote on the Eucharist,

Christ is always present in His Church, especially in her liturgical celebrations. He is present in the sacrifice of the Mass, not only in the person of His minister, “the same now offering, through the ministry of priests, who formerly offered himself on the cross,” but especially under the Eucharistic species.
At the Last Supper, on the night when He was betrayed, our Savior instituted the Eucharistic Sacrifice of His Body and Blood. He did this in order to perpetuate the sacrifice of the Cross throughout the centuries until He should come again.
In the house of prayer the most Holy Eucharist is celebrated and preserved. There the faithful gather, and find help and comfort through venerating the presence of the Son of God our Savior, offered for us on the sacrificial altar (The Documents of Vatican II, Walter M. Abbott, S.J., General Editor. (Chicago: Follett, 1966), pp. 140-141, 154, 543).

John Stott on the Cross of Jesus

John Stott wrote,

The repeated promises in the Qur'an of the forgiveness of a compassionate and merciful Allah are all made to the meritorious, whose merits have been weighed in Allah's scales, whereas the gospel is good news of mercy to the undeserving. The symbol of the religion of Jesus is the cross, not the scales.

A Theological Study of Baptismal Regeneration and the Cross

1 Corinthians 1:17 KJV

For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

"For Christ sent me not to baptize."  The apostle Paul was sent directly by God through supernatural revelation of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ about the supernatural gospel of God.  He was not sent to baptize.  Isn't that "out of place" if infant baptism takes away and pardons original sin?  Why would the great apostle Paul neglect alleged "baptismal regeneration" if he indeed believed it could save the soul?  Could it be that "baptismal regeneration" is a man-made teaching that denies the gospel by adding to the glad tidings of Christ?  Remember Paul comes to preach the supremacy of the Cross in the gospel.  He does not come to baptize the sons and daughters of Adam.  Rather he comes to preach the centrality of the Cross.  

"...but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words."  Paul came to preach the gospel of the Cross.  He did not come with wisdom of words.  He equals by implication "preaching baptism to save" with "wisdom of words."  The preaching of a baptism that saves is a mistaken doctrine of the wisdom of mere men.  It is the wisdom of words.   Rather we ought to preach the supremacy and centrality of the gospel of the Cross of our God and Creator.

"...lest the Cross of Christ should be of none effect."  We ought to never preach baptism as some doctrine that saves us or pardons sin.  If we add to the Cross it is useless and worthless.   It becomes of none effect.  The Cross stands on its own as the way sinners are pardoned, forgiven, cleansed and provided with abundant divine grace.  The Cross is the way to receive supernatural grace.  Romanism adds to the Cross through baptismal regeneration.  It is contrary to the Bible and the doctrine of the Cross. 

The Divine Grace of the Cross, Purgatory and Mt 5:26

Many sincere Roman Catholic apologists will say that Mt 5:26 supports the Roman Catholic teaching of purgatory.  The Bible does not support the teaching of purgatory.  There was never a Old Testament understanding of purgatory nor a New Testament claim of purgatory.  Rather the teaching of purgatory is an invention of man-made tradition.  Ludwig Ott says that Mt 5:26 supports the Roman teaching of purgatory. 

They take a errant interpretation of 2 Maccabees 12 and apply this tradition of men to the New Testament.  2 Maccabees is not inspired or infallible Scripture.  We know that Jesus never quoted from these false writings.   We see that not only Luther rejected these writings but also Jerome.  I am also not saying that 2 Maccabees teaches purgatory.  Rather I am saying that the spiritual prison that Jesus speaks about is something that happens before someone dies.  It does not happen after someone dies because it does not refer to purgatory (cf.  Mt 5:25).  There is nothing in Matthew chapter 5 that refers to the purification of the flames of purgatory.  The former pope concluded that it is not a kind of "concentration camp."  

There is nothing to pay because Jesus paid it all at the Cross.  Purgatory is a denial of the unanimous testimony of divine Scriptures on the perpetuity of the Cross.   

Boast in the Cross Alone: A 2-Point Bible Study on Galatians 6:14

Galatians 6:14KJV
But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.

1.  Christians ought to boast in the Cross of Jesus Christ alone.  That is where our sins are pardon, forgiven and cleansed.  It is where punishment, vile sin and reprobative wrath is placed on Christ alone at His Cross.  It is where hell is placed on Jesus.  No one could endure the Cross except the God-man.  A mere sinner could never endure the Cross because it was the very redemptive wrath of God.  In no uncertain terms it was the very fury and outright punishment of God.  Jesus endured this wrath of God in our place.  He willingly took our place and suffered what we would suffer in eternity in hell.  That is, Jesus suffered hell in all its darkness and cruelty and fury because it was placed on Jesus at His Cross in behalf of hell-deserving sinners.  We may boast in the Cross of Jesus because it is where we get our divine righteousness alone by faith alone.  Reformed theology is so awesome in light of the Divine Word because we cannot glory in our faith.  The faith of a Christian did not come from our personal decision or human wills.  Rather it came from the divine regeneration of a sinner by the Spirit and the Word.  That is, the Spirit and the Word bring Christ to us through a changed heart by faith alone.   We receive the holy gift of faith through God the Spirit and the written Word.  It is able to change our hearts.  Man-made religion may bring outward reform in some way but it cannot radically change the heart like the Spirit and the Word.  Religions of men make the hearts of men spiritual fat.  The Christian ought to have a baby-skin heart by God's invisible handiwork in progressive sanctification. 

2.  We may boat that our sins are forgiven because of the Cross of Jesus alone.  We did not do the redemptive work.  No, He did!  We did not add to His redemptive sufferings.  No, He did it!  We did not contribute to His unified merit in our behalf.  No, it was Him all the way!  Boast in the Cross of Jesus Christ alone.  Do not glory in anything else.  Good works are filthy rages.  We are corrupt from birth.  There is no hope except for the Cross of Jesus alone.  The Cross of Jesus provides a way of spiritual escape.  We need sufficient atonement made by some who is God and man.  Jesus has two natures; God and man in One Person.  He is the only One who could die for the sins of God's people in obedience to His Father.  Who really killed Jesus Christ?  Was it the Jews?  Was it the Romans?  Was it His people?  The Person who determined to crush Jesus according to His foreordained counsel was God the Father.  It was the Father's perfect will and good pleasure to put His Son to death.  The divine Son was plainly humiliated in openness and in public in behalf of God's people.  People never think of the Father's love because they see a wrathful God.  It is true, however, that there is a wrath of the Father but it was placed on His dear Son as the Lamb of sacrifice!  This must show us the extreme and eternal and incomprehensible love of the Father.  We must understand that it was the Father's design or plan to have His Son bear the full and entire and max of the sins of God's people.  It is was where sin was punished and where sin is forgiven.  It is where justice is satisfied and where righteousness is provided.  That is why no one has the right to glory in His presence when all of our deeds are worthless.  The only deed that is good is through the person and work of Jesus alone.  If God calls someone 'good' it is not because we are 'good' by nature but because we possess the 'goodness of Jesus' by faith alone!  The Cross is the profound  and eternal reason why we stand before God.

Purgatory Denies the Sufficiency of the Cross of Christ

The Bible does not teach purgatory.  Rather it teaches the sufficiency of the Cross of Jesus.  Jesus is the only Person who was able to endure the redemptive suffering of the Cross.  Rome believes that punishment through purgatory can purify us through divine flames.  For lets understand the Roman position,

1031 The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned. The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. The tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture, speaks of a cleansing fire: As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come.

1498 Through indulgences the faithful can obtain the remission of temporal punishment resulting from sin for themselves and also for the souls in Purgatory.

1475 In the communion of saints, "a perennial link of charity exists between the faithful who have already reached their heavenly home, those who are expiating their sins in purgatory and those who are still pilgrims on earth. Between them there is, too, an abundant exchange of all good things." In this wonderful exchange, the holiness of one profits others, well beyond the harm that the sin of one could cause others. Thus recourse to the communion of saints lets the contrite sinner be more promptly and efficaciously purified of the punishments for sin.

1472 To understand this doctrine and practice of the Church, it is necessary to understand that sin has a double consequence. Grave sin deprives us of communion with God and therefore makes us incapable of eternal life, the privation of which is called the "eternal punishment" of sin. On the other hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called Purgatory. This purification frees one from what is called the "temporal punishment" of sin. These two punishments must not be conceived of as a kind of vengeance inflicted by God from without, but as following from the very nature of sin. A conversion which proceeds from a fervent charity can attain the complete purification of the sinner in such a way that no punishment would remain.

The problem with purgatory is that it is the fallible wisdom of men and the Cross is totally hindered through the undivine teaching of purgatory (1 Corinthians 1:17).  To the foolish the Cross of Jesus is foolishness but to the true Christian it alone is the very power of God (1 Corinthians 1:18).  It is by the nature of man that sinners want to take part in their spiritual salvation.  It is by the sinful nature of man that sinners want to suffer for sin redemptively and contribute to the all-matchless Cross of the Lamb of God.  

Was Jesus Crucified in light of the Claims of Muslims?

Surah 4:157-158 states:

"That they said (in boast), 'We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah'—but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not—nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself."

The Quran seems to say that Jews did not crucify Jesus.  Rather the Romans crucified Jesus Christ.  Do Muslims interpret the Quran correctly in attempts to deny the historical and theological implications of the Cross of Jesus Christ?  If the Cross is denied, we have no spiritual salvation or redemption.  It was the wages of sin that took Jesus to His Cross according to His Father's will.  Jesus Himself predicts His death and resurrection in Matthew 17:22-23.  Surah 3:54 also speaks about the death of Jesus but Muslims deny the historical and spiritual value of the Cross.  We ought to stand on the all-trustworthy Scripture in the Bible because it is the infallible Word of God about the Cross of Jesus Christ.

The Cross is Meant for Totally Depraved Sinners

We see in many non-Christian cults and world religions the teaching of the goodness of man.  I suggest to you that this is a radical addition to the all-perfect, all-pure, all-sinless, and all-righteous Cross of Jesus.  The Cross of Jesus provides us with the imputation of His sinless and divine righteousness.  Why would God provide us with Jesus' divine righteousness by faith alone if we are good by nature?  The Cross is the total solution for totally depraved sinners.  There is no other divine solution for sinners.  I emphasize the supremacy of the Cross because Paul himself is Cross-centered.  The Cross of Jesus will bring us to everlasting glory through the Father's dear Son alone!  However, I do not reject the all-necessary life of Jesus Christ in behalf of His people.  The teaching of that denies the life of Jesus in the justification of sinners regarding the person and work of Christ is biblically unacceptable.  Rome says that by nature we want to seek the truth.   The Bible says we are spiritually stupid or spiritually mute.   It is true that we seek religion by nature but not God's way of truth in His written Word.  For Rome says:

2467 Man tends by nature toward the truth. He is obliged to honor and bear witness to it: "It is in accordance with their dignity that all men, because they are persons . . . are both impelled by their nature and bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to the truth once they come to know it and direct their whole lives in accordance with the demands of truth."

To add some sort of goodness to man by nature is contrary to the Bible.  That is, there is something in man that does not need God's divine help.  Islam also says that man is good, but the Bible says we are totally depraved (Romans 3).  To say we are good by nature "in other words" is contrary to the Cross.  The Cross provides us with total and complete righteousness.  Sin has spiritually blinded our eyes.  We cannot tend toward the truth but to spiritually falsehood.  To rely on the nature of man for anything is a way for spiritual ruin and radical departure and destruction.   We desperately need the divine intervention of the Spirit of God and the Word of God in our hearts.  The Cross is the only solution to the abominable witchcraft of man.

The Roman Teaching of the Cross in Light of the Bible

The Bible teaches the all-sufficient redemptive work of the Cross of Jesus Christ in behalf of His people.  The Roman Catholic teaching of the Cross is that  it is "not exclusively" the "cause of our redemption."  Reformed people profess the life and death of Christ alone as the sole grounds for how someone is right with God through God's dear Son alone through the Holy Spirit.  Jesus said on the Cross "It is finished" that means "It is paid in full."  The Cross paid for every curse and every debt of a Christian believer.  

Christ’s redemptive activity finds its apogee in the death of sacrifice on the cross. On this account it is by excellence but not exclusively the efficient cause of our redemption....No one can be just to whom the merits of Christ’s passion have not been communicated. It is a fundamental doctrine of St. Paul that salvation can be acquired only by the grace merited by Christ (Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma (Rockford: Tan, 1974), pp. 185, 190).

There is the necessity of purgatory.  That is, Rome adds this among other things to the Cross of Jesus Christ.  If a Protestant denies purgatory, they are cursed because of the Council of Trent.  Let us deeply ponder what is being told to us.  For Rome says:

If anyone says that after the reception of the grace of justification the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out to every repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be discharged either in this world or in purgatory before the gates of heaven can be opened, let him be anathema (The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, in Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1919 ed.), pp. 214, 46).

The Cross of Jesus takes away every sinful debt and punishment.  There is no spiritual or redemptive punishment left because of the spiritual application of the fulfillment of divine satisfaction at the Cross.

The All-Sufficient Cross of the Lamb of God: An Exhortation on 1 Corinthians 1:23-24 in light of the Orthodox Interpretation of the Atonement

The apostle Paul preached the very Cross of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.  He proclaimed that the Cross was a stumblingblock to the Jewish people and it was foolishness to the Greeks.  However, God calls both Jew and Gentile from every tribe, tongue, people and nation.  The Cross of Jesus Christ is the very power of God and the very wisdom of God.  No mere human being could invent the Cross of the Lamb.  We see that Islam through man-made tradition rejects the crucified Christ.  But it is surely not the teaching of the Quran that rejects the Cross.  It is the teaching of mere men.  I would like to point out that how can Rome say she worships the same God as Islam (RC 841) when Muslims reject the very Cross itself.  The wisdom of the world adds to the Cross.  The wisdom of the world takes away from the Cross.  It either adds or subtracts from the Cross.  God has given us His sinless and perfect wisdom from heaven.  That is, it is the very Cross of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.  Human minds see the Cross as nothing.  Human minds see the Cross as a romantic or tragic hero.  Human minds see the Cross as a made-man invention.  The bodily resurrection of Jesus proves the redemptive value of the Cross.  Spiritual salvation is not through mere repentance to Allah or to a false Trinity.  Rather repentance is through the crucified Savior!  Sinners boast of wisdom, but it is devoid of the Cross.  Rome says to look to the Cross as an example of suffering, but she adds a plethora of man-made traditions like "indulgences."  Many fall for the worldly wisdom of something that is not the Cross of Jesus.  Orthodoxy links the atonement to deification.  I would like to kindly point out that the Bible never makes such a cosmic or spiritual leap!  An Orthodox author wrote,

As a result of the Orthodox emphasis on the idea of victory over death, evangelicals are likely to be critical of the Orthodox understanding of the atonement, since it seems to ignore the substitutionary, juridical elements which we believe are central to the work of Christ. However, it is not completely accurate to assert that the Orthodox ignore these elements. Orthodox theology does recognize the substitutionary aspects of the atonement which are so critical to evangelical thought, although it does not strongly emphasize them. The major difference between evangelical and Orthodox atonement theory lies not in the exclusive adherence to a single view, but in the way Eastern Christendom links the atonement to humanity's purpose of deification (Don Fairbairn, Partakers of the Divine Nature, p. 50).

The purpose of the Cross is not to be a god.  The Bible says "Thou shalt have no other gods besides Me" in the first of the Ten Commandments.  Why would that be different in heaven?  The Bible forbids the deification of sinners.  There was an ancient king in the Old Testament who exalted himself to godhood.  God crushed his attempts to rise up as God.  God's written Word says to man "you are not god, but you are a mere man!"  The all-sufficient atonement is not meant to be a theory of godhood.  I have researched the teaching or theory for many years of the teaching of "godhood."  I suggest to you that it is biblically impossible to rightly advocate man as a god whether at conception or at glorification.  Rome exalts man and says by nature he is good in some way.  Man either exalts man at conception or at glorification.  Glorification is not a pathway to godhood.  Rather it is the pathway to sinlessness as a true creature of God.  We will not be worshiped as a god in heaven.  The only theologically and doctrinally proper teaching of God is that He is self-existent.  That is, God always existed as God.  Therefore, as creatures we had a beginning but if God is God He cannot have a beginning.  Jesus Christ was conceived in His mother's womb by the power of the overshadowedness of God's Spirit.  That is touching His humanity but not His deity.  Touching His deity, Jesus always was God the Son.  God the Son became man in Jesus Christ our Friend and Bishop!   The only incarnation of God is Jesus Christ and that will never change.  To make a theory of the atonement to defy man is purely man-made.  I suggest to you that there is no biblical support for such a view!  The atonement of Jesus is meant to take away sin and provide us with His righteousness imputed to a regenerate sinner through apprehending Christ by faith alone.  Why does Orthodoxy need to defy mere man when we will simply be glorified sinners?  The spiritual reward of the atonement in the end is not godhood.   Rather it is the worship and honor and magnification and glorification of the Triune Jehovah!  I suggest to you that this is also where Mormonism has gone wrong in some sense.  The Mormon church defies her members, but the Bible says that man by nature is a creature.  No mere human being could possess the self-existent nature of God, because God alone is eternally self-existent.  Many say that Satan is a god.  I beg to differ!  God is the God of this Age that blinds the minds of men!  There are no gods.  Rather the gods in the Old Testament refer to demonic idols of graven images.  We will always be sinners saved by grace until we are transformed into sinless saints to worship God forever, because He alone is God.  Therefore let God be God!  I will never worship a god besides the Triune Lord of the Bible alone (Matthew 28ff).  Amen.

J.C. Ryle on the Cross of Jesus Christ

J.C. Ryle wrote,

All Christ's sufferings on the cross were foreordained. They did not come on Him by chance or accident: they were all planned, counseled, and determined from all eternity. The cross was foreseen in all the provisions of the everlasting Trinity, for the salvation of sinners. In the purposes of God the cross was set up from everlasting. Not one throb of pain did Jesus feel, not one precious drop of blood did Jesus shed, which had not been appointed long ago. Infinite wisdom planned that redemption should be by the cross. Infinite wisdom brought Jesus to the cross in due time.  He was crucified by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God.  (The Cross: A Call to the Fundamentals of Religion).