Ultimate Refutation Of PSA | Fr Stephen De Young | Warren McGrew
Overview
A nearly four-and-a-half-hour panel (Ben/“Cleave to Antiquity” hosting Warren McGrew, Alex Saurin, and Fr. Stephen De Young, later joined by Fr. Josiah Trenham) that uses a Twitter spat with Dr. Jordan Cooper as a springboard into a wide-ranging demolition of penal substitutionary atonement (PSA). FDY’s through-line: PSA is not merely unbiblical but logically incoherent — it forces a choice between dividing the Trinity and dividing Christ’s natures (Nestorianism), it presupposes a nominalist metaphysics and a works-righteousness scheme (Christ earning eternal life by perfect Torah-keeping, imputed to believers), and it collapses the moment you read the Torah’s actual blessings/curses, the sacrificial system, and the Fathers. The back half turns pastoral: quote-mining, AI-fabricated patristic citations, “Latinizer” online Orthodoxy, and the ecclesial/ascetic danger of private judgment.
1. The Cooper spat and the “spiritual death” bait-and-switch
The panel opens with Alex’s run-in with Dr. Jordan Cooper, whom they treat as evasive — Cooper allegedly made a response video calling Alex a “grifter” before even watching his announcement, and later said Alex was “not worth engaging” despite never having spoken to him 2:27. FDY notes his only interactions with Cooper were “comedically” trolling his YouTube live chat 3:16. The substantive point: Cooper’s video didn’t engage the argument but merely denied he meant what he said — yet Cooper defined spiritual death as separation from God and used Genesis 3, exactly as FDY did 4:04. The real issue was never “how does the Father forsake the Son” but whether it is controversial that the Son underwent the punishment of spiritual death — and Cooper uses the same language when defending PSA 4:04. FDY’s verdict: “the merits of PSA are bad anyways… there aren’t any” 4:52.
2. The retreat to satisfaction theory as an admission
Warren argues that when pressed, PSA defenders abandon PSA’s unique entailments and slide to satisfaction theory — Christ’s sufferings satisfy justice so God need not punish us, rather than Christ taking the punishment 5:40. FDY frames this as a Jenga tower: Calvinism is a tight logical system, and pulling PSA out collapses the rest 7:20. The key logical point: if Christ actually bore the punishment for actual sins, God cannot also punish the sinners — so PSA requires either limited atonement or universalism 8:18. FDY notes even Arminians historically held a form of limited atonement (Christ died for those God foresaw would believe) 9:04, and that Barth resolved it by making everyone reprobate in Adam and elect in Christ 8:18. Warren describes his own exit from Calvinism as terror that he was leaving Christ, since he had conflated PSA with the gospel 9:54.
3. The Christological dilemma: Trinity or natures must split
FDY’s central argument: if Christ suffers spiritual death (separation from God), only two options exist — either the first and second persons of the Trinity are separated, or Christ’s divine and human natures are separated 15:05. He got William Lane Craig to “double down on his Apollinarian Christology” by this route: Craig answered that the Logos departed from the human nature, so only Christ’s humanity died 15:05. FDY respects consistent Calvinists who will bite the bullet and deny the Third Ecumenical Council’s authority more than evasive ones 15:05. He notes the “Mott and Bailey” pattern in William Lane Craig’s public defense (abandoning penalty, substitute, etc., in the Boyd discussion) versus his written position 14:14.
4. Calvin, Vermigli, and the Nestorian entailment
Against claims that no reformer said Christ died a spiritual death, FDY cites Calvin, Institutes II.16.10: “nothing had been done if Christ had only endured corporeal death,” and that Christ bore in his soul “the tortures of a condemned and ruined man” 17:51. FDY argues Calvin does not split the Trinity but takes option two — making him effectively Nestorian: Christ’s divine nature joins the Father and Spirit in damning His human nature 23:02. He points to Vermigli’s Dialogue on the Two Natures of Christ as the standard Calvinist Christology taught in Reformed seminaries, which lays out a Nestorian scheme where the human Christ suffers while the divine nature condemns 25:35. He notes Lutherans have called Calvinists Nestorians for 500 years over this and the extra Calvinisticum 26:26 — hence Cooper (a Lutheran) defending Calvinist Christology is absurd, since Lutherans won’t commune or pray with Calvinists 27:15. FDY also flags Calvin’s Institutes II.16.11, which calls God “the source of death,” contradicting Hebrews 2:14 (the devil holds the power of death) 23:53.
5. The “God didn’t stop loving the Son” quote-mine
The panel dissects the proof-text circulated on X: Calvin says the Father did not stop loving the Son, therefore no spiritual death 22:13. FDY’s response is about critical reading: a single citation doesn’t erase the logical entailment of the surrounding position 24:40. He insists the question is what the position entails, not whether Calvin wrote “I am a Nestorian” 24:40. R.C. Sproul is cited repeatedly as saying Christ was anathema, damned, cut off, cast into outer darkness, lost the beatific vision 29:10 — so the claim that “no mainstream voice uses this language” is false 28:21.
6. Turretin and the persistence of the dilemma
Asked whether Turretin offers an escape, FDY says no: Turretin says the Father withdrew the beatific vision from the Son, which is substantively the same claim in different words 2:55:50. The dilemma is inescapable — “either you’re going to break the hypostatic union or you’re going to break the Trinity; pick one,” and Turretin opts for breaking the Trinity 2:55:50. Finding new vocabulary to loop around the counterargument does nothing 2:56:39.
7. The Torah’s actual blessings and curses — and double imputation’s collapse
FDY’s most distinctive move: the Torah never promises eternal life for perfect commandment-keeping 1:08:39. Deuteronomy’s blessings are long life, many children, peace in the land; the curses are exile, famine, invasion — “there’s nothing in the Torah about hell” 1:07:45. The death penalty is corporeal, and accepting it absolves the sin; no guilt carries into the afterlife 1:08:39. Therefore the Protestant scheme requires an unbiblical premise — that Christ earned eternal life by perfect Torah-observance, which is then imputed to believers 1:11:09. This means Protestantism functionally requires justification by works of the law, which Paul denies 1:12:01. FDY reads Paul’s “curse of the law” (Galatians 3) as the Torah’s own covenant curses, with Paul the Israelite looking at Roman occupation and saying “we didn’t keep it, so we’re under its curse” 1:10:24. He also notes the Torah never has sins placed on an animal before sacrifice 59:20, and that the Day of Atonement blood purifies inanimate objects — the altar, the table — not people 1:29:29.
8. Nominalism, infused vs. imputed righteousness, and theosis
Fr. Josiah (joining around 59:20) argues PSA is premised on nominalism — William of Ockham’s rejection of real essences — so that if there is no universal human nature to assume, salvation must be cashed out legally/forensically rather than ontologically 1:18:19. FDY agrees the “declared righteous” language follows from this, and that nominalism didn’t exist in the first century, so PSA can’t be in Romans 1:21:20. The panel contrasts Luther’s “snow-covered dung” with real transformation 1:22:09. FDY re-reads Romans 8’s “golden chain” as no temporal sequence but aspects of theosis — God makes you righteous, holy, shares His glory 1:23:46. He defines justification via tsedeq/sedaqah: justice is everything in its proper place functioning in harmony; to justify is to put back in order (cf. Daniel’s temple “remaining desolate until” it is restored) 1:27:30. He cites Alistair McGrath on dikaiosynē and the Hebrew sedaqah 1:27:30.
9. Sacrifice, Passover, and the “debt” language
FDY insists the debt language is Passover/manumission, not forensic: ancient slavery was debt-servitude (Jacob and Laban), so remission of debt = being set free 2:34:25. Colossians 2’s “handwriting” is a promissory note, not a “decree” (a Calvinist translation bias) — Christ tears up the note of debt 2:35:15. The whole sacrificial system exists so the holy God can dwell among a sinful people without destroying them or departing (Ezekiel’s vision of God leaving the temple); the closer one draws, the higher the holiness required (Israel → Levites → priests → high priest) 2:59:09. He notes the Latin “quantitative” link between sin and suffering underlies satisfaction, purgatory, indulgences, and merits (“ethereal papist bitcoin”), tracing merits to Peter Lombard 2:23:47.
10. 2 Corinthians 5:21 and Galatians 3:13 — “became sin,” “became a curse”
FDY: the Hebrew word for sin and sin offering is identical, so “He who knew no sin became sin for us” is “became a sin offering” 2:38:43. He recounts demonstrating this to an Orthodox Jewish friend and a yeshiva-trained interlocutor, who back-translated the verse and saw the wordplay — evidence Paul was Jewish 2:38:43. He credits St. Cyril of Alexandria’s commentary (and Fr. Joseph Lucas’s dissertation on Cyril and sacrifice) with preserving Jewish contextual knowledge from Alexandria’s large Jewish community 2:39:32. On Galatians 3:13, “curse” means the Torah’s covenant curses and the post-Edenic world of thorns, sweat, and Roman crucifixion — Christ voluntarily accepted our lot under the curse, not that God cursed Him 2:41:57. He notes Justin’s Dialogue with Trypho, where Trypho uses the PSA-style argument (God cursed Jesus, so he isn’t Messiah) and Justin refutes it — yet PSA advocates quote Justin as if endorsing it 2:41:10. He also cites 1 Corinthians 12:3 (“no one speaking by the Spirit says Jesus is anathema”) against those who attribute that verdict to the Holy Spirit 2:43:50.
11. Quote-mining, AI fabrications, and the “Latin captivity”
The panel examines screenshots of alleged patristic PSA quotes (e.g., St. Innocent of Kherson, 19th c.) 39:15. FDY’s rules: (1) we’re reading English translations of unknown provenance; (2) a saint’s name doesn’t make a homily infallible — he cites St. Gregory of Nyssa (universalism, per some readings), St. John Chrysostom (apparent statements about the Theotokos’s sins), and Metropolitan Kallistos’s The Orthodox Way (a bad reading of Psalm 22, a Gnostic gospel quote) 40:49. He explains the “Latin captivity” of Russian/Eastern European theology (17th–19th c.), when Latin was forced in seminaries and Jesuit curricula shaped the language, so saints expressed Orthodoxy in Western categories 44:10. Warren describes finding translator bias when checking originals 42:28. FDY warns against AI-generated citations — he received seven or eight AI-fabricated “patristic quotes” about Samson, and notes Uncut Mountain Supply photoshopped a non-canonical Samson icon to rebut him 50:06. He cites St. Ephrem the Syrian (On Paradise) placing Samson in hell 50:06. The panel invokes Irenaeus’s image of the heretic rearranging mosaic tiles of the King into a dog 1:31:07.
12. The Samson/Hebrews 11 tangent and creation ex nihilo
A viewer cites Hebrews 11:32 as proof Samson is a saint; FDY: “St. Paul says, ‘I don’t have time to talk about Samson’” — it doesn’t weigh in on his sainthood 2:54:15. On creation: Genesis 1 describes creation out of chaos poetically, while creation ex nihilo appears elsewhere (Proverbs, Wisdom); in the ancient Near East, chaos by definition isn’t a thing once created, so “who created the chaos?” is nonsensical — this doesn’t deny ex nihilo 3:34:30. He compares it to Aristotle’s prime matter 3:35:19.
13. Ecclesiology, hierarchy, and the danger of private judgment
Fr. Josiah presses the normative question: if two online Orthodox read the Fathers differently, how is it legally/ecclesially settled? 1:38:01 He quotes Fr. Russ: “There’s one thing you can do by yourself — go to hell” 1:37:10. FDY and the panel note the “Latinizers” call bishops and priests “modernists” while functioning as their own authority — a Protestant move 1:38:49. On St. Maximus and St. Stephen the New: “They were saints first” — they didn’t become saints by judging bishops, and they paid with tongues, hands, and martyrdom, unlike keyboard warriors who parish-shop 1:41:15. FDY describes hierarchy as mutual accountability — he answers to his bishop and will give an account for every parishioner; his wife and children are his responsibility, not his subjects 1:50:11. Submission only counts when you disagree 1:51:48. He cites Elder Thaddeus of Vitovnica’s Our Thoughts Determine Our Lives — the novice who let a demon do his praying while he read philosophy, and lost his mind 1:43:46 — as a warning about the demonic “deal” behind intellectual pride. He asks such people, “Does your priest know you believe this?” and they never produce a name 1:45:22. He discusses Joshua Schuping’s apostasy: sent to seminary, refused ordination by one bishop, bishop-shopped, then left for a better-paying church, now an active opponent 1:33:56.
14. Odds and ends: Q source, Freemasonry, papacy, and the Fathers on Genesis 6
- Q source: FDY explains the Quelle hypothesis (identical Greek in Matthew/Luke), its use to date the Gospel of Thomas early, and its near-abandonment for the Griesbach hypothesis (Luke used Matthew) 2:50:07.
- Genesis 6: FDY agrees broadly with Heiser but rejects direct angelic-human conception; he reads it as describing pagan ritual (temple/shrine prostitution, royal succession rites), citing the Japanese daijōsai 3:56:48. He notes the Fathers before ~400 (Justin, Irenaeus) held the “angels” view, and after ~430 (Chrysostom, Cyril) switched to Seth/Cain — coinciding with the closing of pagan temples in 381, when the rituals were no longer familiar 3:57:46.
- Christ’s two energies: Christ acts according to one nature or the other — walking = human energy, walking on water/forgiving sins = divine; suffering is according to the human nature only (divinity is impassible) 2:13:18, 3:59:30.
- Papacy: FDY cites Leo’s Letter 120, where Leo says the Synod of Chalcedon “added something” to his Tome and that he submits to its authority — against ex cathedra readings 3:24:24; the panel notes the Chieti document conceding reception by the whole Church as the test of ecumenicity 3:21:11.
- Donatism: Roman sacraments are invalid not because of clergy moral turpitude but because of schism; the Donatist controversy was about the Donatists’ own justification for schism 2:25:23.
- Freemasonry: previewing a planned conversation with Aiden Mattis, FDY suggests asking “What would it take for you to renounce it?” 3:14:30.
- Monasticism vs. marriage: Orthodoxy doesn’t teach monasticism is superior; each is called to one for salvation 4:07:51.
- Wes Huff: FDY finds his takes “normie Protestant” and unremarkable, noting his rise came from debating Billy Carson 3:28:37.
FDY’s positions in brief
| Topic | FDY’s view | Where |
|---|---|---|
| PSA’s coherence | No merits to evaluate; it is incoherent | 4:52 |
| Spiritual death of Christ | Forces a choice: split the Trinity or split Christ’s natures | 15:05 |
| Calvin | Effectively Nestorian — divine nature joins Father/Spirit in damning the human nature | 23:02 |
| Vermigli | Standard Calvinist Christology is Nestorian, laid out in Dialogue on the Two Natures | 25:35 |
| Turretin | Same claim in new words; opts to break the Trinity | 2:55:50 |
| Satisfaction theory | What PSA defenders retreat to when pressed; a different theory | 5:40 |
| Limited atonement | Logically required by PSA (or universalism) | 8:18 |
| Torah’s blessings/curses | This-worldly (land, children, exile, famine); never eternal life/hell | 1:08:39 |
| Double imputation | Requires Christ earning eternal life by Torah-works — i.e., justification by works | 1:11:09 |
| Nominalism | PSA presupposes it; absent in the first century | 1:21:20 |
| Justification | Putting things back in order (sedaqah), not legal declaration | 1:27:30 |
| Romans 8 “golden chain” | No temporal sequence; aspects of theosis | 1:23:46 |
| Debt language | Passover/manumission, not forensic | 2:34:25 |
| Colossians 2 “handwriting” | A promissory note, not a “decree” | 2:35:15 |
| 2 Cor 5:21 | ”Became a sin offering” (Hebrew wordplay) | 2:38:43 |
| Gal 3:13 | Christ accepted our lot under the Torah’s covenant curses, not God’s curse on Him | 2:41:57 |
| Sins on an animal | Never happens in the Torah | 59:20 |
| Day of Atonement | Blood purifies objects (altar, table), not people | 1:29:29 |
| Patristic quote-mining | Saints can err in homilies; check originals and context | 40:49 |
| AI citations | Unreliable; must be source-checked | 50:06 |
| Samson | Not on the Orthodox calendar; St. Ephrem places him in hell | 50:06 |
| Genesis 6 | Pagan ritual, not angelic conception; Fathers shifted view post-381 | 3:56:48 |
| Creation | Genesis 1 = out of chaos; ex nihilo taught elsewhere | 3:34:30 |
| Christ’s energies | Two energies; suffering only according to humanity | 3:59:30 |
| Hierarchy | Mutual accountability; submission counts only in disagreement | 1:50:11 |
| Schuping | A foe of the Church; bishop-shopped, now apostate | 1:33:56 |
References surfaced
Biblical: Genesis 1; Genesis 3; Genesis 6; Leviticus 16; Deuteronomy 27–28; Proverbs 8; Wisdom; Psalm 22; Isaiah (Cyril’s commentary); Daniel (abomination of desolation); Ezekiel 1 (God departing the temple); Jeremiah 31; Amos 2:1; Joel 3:5; Ezekiel 5:7; Matthew 19; Matthew 22 (wedding garment); Luke 1 (Magnificat); Luke 24; John 1; Acts 2:24; Romans 3; Romans 8; 1 Corinthians 3; 1 Corinthians 7; 1 Corinthians 12:3; 2 Corinthians 5:21; Galatians 3:13; Colossians 2; Hebrews 2:14; Hebrews 11:32.
Patristic: St. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho; St. Irenaeus (mosaic-tiles image); St. Clement of Alexandria; St. Athanasius; St. Cyril of Alexandria (commentary on Isaiah, on Romans, on 2 Cor 5:21); St. John Chrysostom (Homilies on Romans); St. Gregory of Nyssa (Life of Moses); St. Gregory Palamas; St. Maximus the Confessor (Cosmic Mystery of Christ); St. Ephrem the Syrian (On Paradise); St. Innocent of Kherson; St. Leo the Great, Letter 120; St. Augustine (anti-Donatist writings); Theodoret of Cyrus; St. Nectarios; St. Stephen the New; St. Silouan.
Scholarly / historical: John Calvin, Institutes II.16.10–11; Peter Vermigli, Dialogue on the Two Natures of Christ; Francis Turretin, On the Atonement; R.C. Sproul; William Lane Craig; Thomas Aquinas; Peter Lombard; William of Ockham (nominalism); Siger of Brabant and the Latin Averroists; Alistair McGrath (on justification); Richard Muller (Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics); Scott Clark; Metropolitan Kallistos Ware (The Orthodox Way); Elder Thaddeus (Our Thoughts Determine Our Lives); Fr. Joseph Lucas (dissertation on Cyril and sacrifice); Michael Heiser; the Chieti document; the Council of Trent; the Synod of Dort; the Griesbach hypothesis and Q/Quelle; the Gospel of Thomas; the daijōsai; Jordan Cooper; Eric Ibarra; Joshua Schuping; Wes Huff; Gavin Ortland; James White; Matt Slick; Aiden Mattis.