How Do We Avoid Popular Atonement Misconceptions?

Dr. Craig answers about how we teach and preach on Penal Substitutionary Atonement in a way that avoids popular misconceptions. This question was submitted online following his lecture for Apologia Sweden.

QUESTION: When teaching and preaching penal substitution, how do we avoid popular misunderstandings such as “cosmic child abuse” or “God sacrifices himself to himself to save mankind from himself.”

DR. CRAIG: I think that what we have to do is to try to explain it as best we can and portray the incarnation and passion of Christ as an act of voluntary divine self-substitution and self-sacrifice. As such, it is a noble act, a praiseworthy act, that God would stoop to bear our punishment and pain out of his love for us to redeem us from our own sin and perdition. I think if we portray the incarnation and passion as a voluntary act of divine self-sacrifice then that takes on the correct appearance of being a noble action on God's part. Now the part I would disagree with would be where it says “he saves us from himself.” It's not God who is our enemy here. It's ourselves. It is our just desert to be punished for our sin. Here this might involve defending a retributive theory of justice which, fortunately, during the last part of the 20th century has once again become the mainstream view among legal theorists and philosophers of law. A retributive theory of justice says that punishment is justified because the guilty deserve it. The guilty deserve to be punished. And that's why the state is justified in administering harsh treatment to its citizens who commit crimes. On a retributive theory of justice, it is we who have committed moral wrongdoing, and it is our just desert to be punished. This redounds to God's righteousness and holiness and justice.