Ed Stevens on the Substitutionary Death of Christ- Physical or Spiritual?
Ed Stevens on the Substitutionary Physical Death of Christ – Physical or Spiritual?
In a recent interview with Zach Davis, Ed Stevens said that if Christ’s substitutionary death was spiritual, that should mean that there is no spiritual death today. He also said that the CBV (the Covenant Body View of the resurrection) has a serious problem by positing Christ’s substitutionary death as spiritual. He said that if there was no rapture in AD 66 or AD 70 and that if the substitutionary death of Christ was spiritual, that this would demand that there is no spiritual death today. I literally could not believe what I was hearing when he said this.
In our written debate, in my affirmatives, I have argued repeatedly that Stevens’ view of a substituationary physical death of Christ would demand that for those “in Christ” there is no physical death. Stevens has persistently refused to address this massive problem.
Stevens now tells us that physical death is actually “natural” (his word) and not part of the Adamic Curse. YET, in his interview with Davis, he said that in fact physical death did enter the day Adam sinned! Well, you can’t say on the one hand that physical death is natural and not a part of the Adamic Curse and then turn around and say that physical death entered the day Adam sinned. That is a massive contradiction.
What about Stevens’ argument that the non-rapturist view that posits Jesus’ substituttionary death on the cross as spiritual poses a severe problem for the CBV? (He never tried to explain how a non-rapturist view actually plays into this discussion. He simply asserted it).
Would and does that view logically demand that the following:
The death of Christ on the Cross was spiritual death- i.e. he was alienated / forsaken by the Father while on the cross. (Stevens recently admitted– after long denial– that Christ actually WAS forsaken by the Father, resulting in a loss of their fellowship! This is a MASSIVE shift in his view)!
The (spiritual) death of Christ on the cross was substitutionary.
Substitutionary means in the place of, instead of.
Therefore, the substitutionary spiritual death of Christ on the cross means that those in Christ never die spiritually.
Is this argument valid and true? YES! My initial response to Stevens’ claim in the interview was “What is the problem? Isn’t that supposed to be “good news”?
First, for those IN CHRIST, walking by the Spirit– “there is therefore now no condemnation” (Romans 8:1-2). Is this a problem??? The key here is “IN CHRIST.” The “no condemnation,” meaning therefore no death, belongs to those who are IN CHRIST and who continually walk “IN HIM.” This is a problem? But you see, the “no condemnation” does not apply to those who are NOT IN CHRIST! I thought Stevens believed this!
Second, For those in the New Jerusalem, the body of Christ, there is no more death (Revelation 21:3-4). In his interview with Davis, Stevens claimed that Revelation 21:3 refers “strictly to heaven.” He quickly shifted gears however, perhaps realizing the danger of that statement, so he said “There are both aspects to but verse 3 “is heaven only.”
While it is clearly true that due to the work of Christ heaven and earth are now reunited (Ephesians 1:9ff), Revelation 21 is explicitly about the New Jerusalem, the perfected, glorified church, “coming down from God out of heaven” (21:1-2). This singular verse utterly destroys Stevens’ rapture view which had the church leaving earth and going to heaven! Thus, the state of “no death” is not referent to physical death– or else there should be no physical death today.
Third, now, let’s apply Stevens’ own logic that he used in his interview:
If Christ’s substitutionary death was spiritual, there should be no spiritual death, per Ed.
But, let me offer this:
Substitution means in the place of, instead of (Stevens agrees and that is the basis for his argument).
Christ’s physical bodily death was substitutionary (This is the foundation of Stevens’ argument).
Therefore, those in the power of Jesus’ substitutionary death should never die physically.
I am confident that every one knows that since the Lord died on the cross, there has not been one single Christian that has never died physicall right down to the present time. And it will be true for the future as well!
Thus, Stevens’ own argument destroys his doctrine!
Stevens says Jesus’ physical death was substitutionary. In fact, he claims that the non-rapture, CBV view is heretical, unorthodox and dangerous.
Yet, he tells us that thanks to the death of Christ, Christians do not die SPIRITUALLY the day we sin. THE SUBSTITUTIONARY DEATH OF CHRIST PREVENTS IT! (YET, he initially said we DO die spiritually the day we sin).
So, if the physical substitutionary death can prevent us from dying spiritually, why does it not prevent us from dying PHYSICALLY?
Answer: Because Ed tells us that physical death is “natural” and – catch the power of this!!! – was never the focus of Christ’s death or eschatology! This is stunning! Follow me:
Physical death entered the day Adam sinned –Says Ed Stevens.
The work of Christ on the cross and the focus of eschatology, was the overcoming of the Death of Adam (1 Cor. 15:22 / Philippians 3:20-21).
(Stevens claims that Philippians 3 demands the transformation / change of our mortal physical human body. Yet, in an email to me, [2-20-2025] he admitted that NO ONE TODAY undergoes that transformation of their human mortal body! This is stunning!)
Therefore, the overcoming of physical death was the focus of Christ’s substitutionary physical death and of his parousia.
Since physical death was NEVER- Stevens admitting- the focus of Christ’s death or eschatology, then the mortal human physical body was never the focus of the Cross or eschatology. This means that his arguments on 1 Corinthians 15 / 1 Thessalonians 4, Philippians 3, etc. – his entire rapture doctrine– is totally falsified.
Stevens tells us that the reason we don’t die physically the day we sin is because of the substitutionary death of Christ. That does not help! It exacerbates his problem!
If Christ’s physical death was substitutionary, then physical death WAS the focus of his redemptive work, and another of Ed’s foundational doctrines is falsified.
If the substitutionary physical death of Christ keeps us from dying physically the day we sin, WHY DOESN’T IT KEEP US FROM EVER DYING PHYSICALLY?
In light of all of this, and much, much more, Stevens’ claim that the non-rapturist, substitutionary spiritual death of Christ on the cross is problematic, is totally and absolutely falsified.
Be sure to get a copy of my book, The Death of Adam / The Life of Christ for a detailed discussion of this critical issue.
Ed Stevens on the Substitutionary Death of Christ- Physical or Spiritual?