|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Christus Victor
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doulos:
...what we are talking about is how Christ redeemed the world - not if, but how. Therefore, is it absolutely necessary for christians to understand how, or is it enough just to accept and be grateful that Christ did redeem us? I think of the simple affirmations of faith made by so many people whom Jesus touched - is that enough, or is the understanding of what the redemption means so fundamental to christian faith that we really must be clear on what our understanding of salvation is?
In one sense, you are right, this discussion is secondary to the fact, accepted by both sides of this debate, that Jesus did, in deed, redeem us. But, nevertheless, I do think that truth matters, partly (mainly) because of the baggage that flawed theology carries with it. For instance, do we believe that God's implacable wrath is directed towards His fallen creatures, wrath that can only be satisfied by the willing sacrifice of His Son? If we do, then we will have a very different picture of God from that which we will have if we believe that what He was doing through Jesus on the cross was launching a rescue bid for those whom He loves unconditionally. Do we believe that forgiveness is more powerful than punishment in dealing with sin, or do we believe that forgiveness is only possible if the penalty for sin is paid to God. The picture of God which we hold will have a powerful effect on our spiritual development, for good or ill. It will also potentially affect how we deal with our brothers and sisters, and the world. It might also affect whether we see our brothes and sisters as such, or not. These are important issues, not at all esoteric. The doctrine point of itself is less important than the effects upon our life of believing that doctrine. We become like that which we worship.
quote:
Secondly, is it possible to be bowled over by both Christus Victor and aspects of PSA? Or are the two positions so contradictory that they cannot possibly be sychronised? The reason I ask is that I have got so much out of reading all these debates, but am still not very clear as to 'where I stand' and find both CV and PSA (in certain expressions) remarkable, wonderful and compelling, and suspect that the ultimate truth is far bigger than any of us could ever know.
This largely depends on whether you think one of the two views is "wrong". Those who hold nuanced views of PSA, and who accept CV, and there are plenty of them, not least Johnny S of this parish, are quite able to hold the two in tension, and it is a very honourable position to take. It's just that I can't do it. For me, PSA is like a lie told against God. Not that I'm accusing anyone who holds that view of lying against God, it's just that's the effect the doctrine has on me. It seems, to me, to portray God as someOne who behaves in a way which we would find reprehensible in a human being, and, furthermore, in a way which, far from being scriptural, is the antithesis of Jesus' teaching.
But the question is certainly one which requires an answer.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675
|
Posted
So, in order to fully embrace CV one needs to first reject the idea that the prophecy of Isaiah refers to Jesus?
K.
--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
So, in order to fully embrace CV one needs to first reject the idea that the prophecy of Isaiah refers to Jesus?
K.
Well, first of all, the reason that I reject PSA is not so much that it conflicts with CV, but rather that it conflicts with the whole teaching of Scripture. Notwithstanding that, one need not, in order to reject PSA, necessarily dispute that Isaiah 53 refers to Jesus, rather one could reject the PSA-like reading of it. If you look at the article linked to earlier, there is quite a detailed discussion of Isaiah 53 in the context of CV (towards the end of Part 4).
It's not by chance that Isaiah 53 comes up so often. It is the one text that could genuinely be interpredted, at face value, to seem to support PSA. This isolation, in itself, should make us cautious in our exegesis. If the biblical view of the atonement really is PSA, we should expect to find it writ large throughout the scripture, rather than cofined to a single verse in a single passage.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Komensky
Shipmate
# 8675
|
Posted
Nevermind. I typed that before I thought it through.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
K.
--------------------
"The English are not very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity." - George Bernard Shaw
Posts: 1784 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Talitha
Shipmate
# 5085
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Starlight:
quote:
"hardening Pharaoh's heart"
Let's not forget that if I say to a friend "you've made me angry" I don't mean that they've reached inside my skull and overridden my free will and flicked the angry switch, but rather I mean they've done something and I've responded with anger.
That's really helpful, thanks! I've always found that passage a major stumbling-block, but your analysis makes some sense of it.
Posts: 554 | From: Cambridge, UK | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
Today has been an interesting day, amongst other things I was praying in Gloucester cathedral this afternoon and have got back to find that JJ has described me as 'very honourable' ... is that like 'right reverend'? Still, most things I get called aren't very polite.
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Komensky:
So, in order to fully embrace CV one needs to first reject the idea that the prophecy of Isaiah refers to Jesus?
K.
Yes. Isaiah was referring to the people of Israel.
Strictly speaking Isaiah was referring to 'the Servant of the Lord' which is obviously a personification of Israel. The question is whether or not Isaiah 53 looks forward to Jesus as the personification of Israel. The Synoptic gospels (in particular) clearly picture Jesus as being 'true Israel' ... e.g. succeeding in the wilderness where Israel failed.
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
For instance, do we believe that God's implacable wrath is directed towards His fallen creatures, wrath that can only be satisfied by the willing sacrifice of His Son? If we do, then we will have a very different picture of God from that which we will have if we believe that what He was doing through Jesus on the cross was launching a rescue bid for those whom He loves unconditionally. Do we believe that forgiveness is more powerful than punishment in dealing with sin, or do we believe that forgiveness is only possible if the penalty for sin is paid to God. The picture of God which we hold will have a powerful effect on our spiritual development, for good or ill.
Just a comment from personal experience, rather than any significant argument. I've been in a 'PSA supporting environment' all my life but I can honestly say that it never occurred to me that God wants me to act towards others in any other way than in unconditional forgiveness. My intuitive 'default' position was that God's justice created a framework for the world (as it were) that enabled me to forgive unconditionally.
I know that doesn't prove anything. (It could be that I'm so freakishly mixed up that I've come full circle ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif) .)
I suppose it's like getting smacked as a child ... it ain't done me no 'arm! (That's a joke btw before I get endless replies ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif) )
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Originally posted by Johnny S:
quote:
Strictly speaking Isaiah was referring to 'the Servant of the Lord' which is obviously a personification of Israel. The question is whether or not Isaiah 53 looks forward to Jesus as the personification of Israel. The Synoptic gospels (in particular) clearly picture Jesus as being 'true Israel' ... e.g. succeeding in the wilderness where Israel failed.
I think I'd want to say that Jesus is the fulfilment of Israel rather than that he succeeded where Israel failed and that the sojourn in the wilderness typologically anticipates Jesus' fasting for forty days and forty nights. I think - I am not accusing you of this, Johnny - there is a danger of the kind of lazy 'the Jews failed miserably and then Jesus came to set them right' theology which one hears to often from the pulpit. Given the fraught history of Christian - Jewish relationships it is necessary to be precise about this sort of thing.
That said, I think that you are right on the substantive point inasmuch as the Church has always understood the suffering servant bit to refer to our Lord (which is not incompatible with Isaiah meaning something else, again, Christ is the fulfilment of the Hebrew Scriptures).
It is certainly the case that one can understand the language of 'pierced for our transgressions' in the sense of, er, Pierced For Our Transgressions. I disagree with PSA but I wouldn't accuse PSA advocates of just making this stuff up, there are undoubtedly passages in Scripture which PSA advocates can point to with some justice and say "ooh, lookee here! PSA!" just as those of us who hold other views can point to stuff and go "ooh! Anselm!" or "ooh! Christus Victor!" The question is where Scripture as a whole takes us to which, I gather, you would answer "different metaphors of the atonement including PSA" and I'd probably want to say something like "Christus Victor with Anselm's satisfaction theory as the explanation of how the victory is achieved with undoubted penal bits but not in the sense that Jesus is punished in our stead, if you see what I mean, and a bit of moral example thrown in but not as a central explanation of the atonement".
Which, I freely concede, would make a lousy book title. But I don't think isolated texts cut it for whatever version of the atonement one subscribes to.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
I think I'd want to say that Jesus is the fulfilment of Israel rather than that he succeeded where Israel failed and that the sojourn in the wilderness typologically anticipates Jesus' fasting for forty days and forty nights. I think - I am not accusing you of this, Johnny - there is a danger of the kind of lazy 'the Jews failed miserably and then Jesus came to set them right' theology which one hears to often from the pulpit. Given the fraught history of Christian - Jewish relationships it is necessary to be precise about this sort of thing.
While clearly not wanting to antagonise Jewish/Christian relations I'm not sure how else the gospel writers want us to take this? In Luke's account each of the 3 responses Jesus gives to the devil is a quote from Deuteronomy (the book of obedience) - is it just a coincidence that the 40 days mirrors the 40 years? And the the way the narrative ends? (the Israelites had repeatedly put God to the test in the wilderness!)
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
"Christus Victor with Anselm's satisfaction theory as the explanation of how the victory is achieved with undoubted penal bits but not in the sense that Jesus is punished in our stead, if you see what I mean, and a bit of moral example thrown in but not as a central explanation of the atonement".
Have you ever considered a career in publishing?
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Originally posted by Johnny S:
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
I think I'd want to say that Jesus is the fulfilment of Israel rather than that he succeeded where Israel failed and that the sojourn in the wilderness typologically anticipates Jesus' fasting for forty days and forty nights. I think - I am not accusing you of this, Johnny - there is a danger of the kind of lazy 'the Jews failed miserably and then Jesus came to set them right' theology which one hears to often from the pulpit. Given the fraught history of Christian - Jewish relationships it is necessary to be precise about this sort of thing.
While clearly not wanting to antagonise Jewish/Christian relations I'm not sure how else the gospel writers want us to take this? In Luke's account each of the 3 responses Jesus gives to the devil is a quote from Deuteronomy (the book of obedience) - is it just a coincidence that the 40 days mirrors the 40 years? And the the way the narrative ends? (the Israelites had repeatedly put God to the test in the wilderness!)
Hmmm. I'm not sure the Gospels or the subsequent tradition would see the Exodus as a failure. The Israelites did skip Egypt and, eventually, make it to the promised land, after all. Can we agree that Jesus achieved perfectly what the Exodus and the sojourn in the wilderness foreshadowed imperfectly?
[ 25. May 2007, 20:04: Message edited by: Callan ]
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
Can we agree that Jesus achieved perfectly what the Exodus and the sojourn in the wilderness foreshadowed imperfectly?
Agreed ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Qupe
Shipmate
# 12388
|
Posted
Jolly Jape, thank you for such a reasoned, thoughtful answer. I am still working through the various points of view so I won't try and leap in with any ill-informed half-constructed arguments (not just yet, anyway!) ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Needless to say I'm reading (slowly) and thinking (even more slowly!)...
--------------------
'Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad.'
Posts: 802 | From: Down the road from the chocolate factory | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
I was chatting to a friend today who is doing a PhD in Leviticus - I can only presume that he's going to get a BIG reward in heaven - and (naturally ![[Biased]](wink.gif) ) asked him what he thought about the sacrifices in the OT.
It may not surprise you all to know that he is a PSA guy but I was interested to hear that his recent study of Leviticus has only strengthened his opinion.
Two verses in particular which he came across in his research were very interesting:
"If any meat of the fellowship offering is eaten on the third day, it will not be accepted. It will not be credited to the one who offered it, for it is impure; the person who eats any of it will be held responsible." (Lev. 7: 18)
"When you sacrifice a thank offering to the LORD,
sacrifice it in such a way that it will be accepted on your behalf." (Lev. 22: 29)
What is striking is how developed the penal language is - this is language of 'crediting' the effect of the sacrifice to the 'account' of the Israelite.
I'm yet again puzzled by those who claim that PSA is 'sub-biblical'... but I'm sure there will be a queue of people waiting to put me right
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
Apologies for the double post but I'll be busy tomorrow and so thought I'd better leave you all plenty to get your teeth into.
I've been thinking this week a lot about the charge against PSA that it pictures God as saying 'do as I say and not as I do' in the realm of forgiving unconditionally.
It struck me how apparently self-obsessed God is when it comes to worship. He wants us to worship him and only him. However, he doesn't expect us to go around treating each other in the same way (... although there are a few people that I do wonder about ...) and yet no one seems to be bothered about this. It is just a case of ... 'yes, but he's God, isn't he!'
Why can't we apply the same logic to Romans 12 v 19?
![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
John.
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
infinite_monkey
Shipmate
# 11333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Johnny S:
I've been thinking this week a lot about the charge against PSA that it pictures God as saying 'do as I say and not as I do' in the realm of forgiving unconditionally.
It struck me how apparently self-obsessed God is when it comes to worship. He wants us to worship him and only him. However, he doesn't expect us to go around treating each other in the same way (... although there are a few people that I do wonder about ...) and yet no one seems to be bothered about this. It is just a case of ... 'yes, but he's God, isn't he!'
Why can't we apply the same logic to Romans 12 v 19?
John.
Hoping others will have a more eloquent take on this, but to me that's apples and oranges. Loving God above other available deities is in our best interest--it's a position internally consistent with the desires of God both for Himself and for His people. I don't think we shrug it off with "yes, but he's God, isn't he"--that implies a "I don't get it, and I wouldn't do it, but I accept that he's outside the rules."
If one wishes others to accept that about the concept of PSA, I think more support is in order. It seems to me that you could justify divine kitten-eating just as easily with the logic of "but he's God, isn't he". Wouldn't make it consistent with what Jesus shows of the nature of God.
--------------------
His light was lifted just above the Law,
And now we have to live with what we did with what we saw.
--Dar Williams, And a God Descended
Obligatory Blog Flog: www.otherteacher.wordpress.com
Posts: 1423 | From: left coast united states | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Starlight:
[QUOTE] A penal substitutionary account leaves more questions than it gives answers though: Why on earth would God want to kill the firstborn Israelites? Why would he perform this judgment against Israel? Why does the biblical account give no hint that Israel has sinned or angered god or incurred his wrath? Why does the account not say that the Lamb is a substitute? How does the death of the lamb serve as a penal substitute – does it exhaust the angel of death’s killing power or what? If so, why do the Israelites themselves kill the Lamb rather than the angel of death? etc A penal substitutionary theory does not at all flow naturally out of the Passover accounts, you’ve got to already believe in the atonement theory of Penal Substitution and read it backwards into the Passover under the belief that the Passover must have functioned like Christ’s atonement. Over the years I’ve seen more than a few Christians engage in the curiously circular logic that (1) the Passover (and sacrifices in general) must have functioned like Christ’s atonement (ie penal substitution), and that therefore (2) the fact that Christ died on Passover like the sacrificial lamb proves he is a penal substitute since that’s how the Passover sacrifice worked.
God didn't want to kill them. So he didn't. He protected them with the blood of the passover lamb.
Israel were of course tainted with sinfulness as evidenced by later events. That sinfulness meant they needed that protection though of course the whole rescue mission was about God keeping his covenant with Abraham and latterly Jacob.
The lamb is representative of a life-in-lieu which of course is the principle of sacrifice so common in the OT beginning with God clothing the first couple with skins, to Abel, to Abraham's near sacrifice of Isaac etc etc. It may not have stated it was a penal substitute but it is in a long line of substitution tradition!
How does it function? Well the issue of a life for a life was established post flood. Advocates of capital punishment still quote that today.(Gen 9:6) It is clearly stated that the life is seen by God as 'in' the blood. (Lev 17:11) Blood shed always implies a life taken. The lamb functioned as a prototype of the Saviour's function. All things in scripture look forward to the cross and back to it. The blood of an animal was a temporary solution to cover sin pending the time when Christ would enter the throne room of heaven with his own blood (Heb 9:12)which was shed once for all, eliminating for all time the need for a sacrificial system.
Incidentally, a close reading of the Gospels from a Jewish perspective suggests that the hand of the sanhedrin was forced to arrest and try Jesus at the deeply inconvenient time of a Passover feast. It seems that Christ himself triggered this by exposing Judas at the last supper and forcing his hand. It is not what they would have wanted. He ensured his own death in the midst of Passover. I would say therefore that Christ clearly saw himself as the ultimate Passover lamb. This is of course, a view shared by John the Baptist, and John the gospel writer who quoted the former, as referring to Christ as the 'Lamb' of God.
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
HI JJ. You are indeed saved by grace through faith but your faith is in the efficacy of his blood as an atoning sacrifice. (Ro 5: 9 and 3:25). Grace is based in faith that Christ has died for you and his death involved shedding of blood, taking of life (plod plod) and you are hereby set free from both your sins and your sinfulness because God accepts the life of Christ in your place. He has punished himself instead of you but not only has he done this, the resurrection of Christ also includes us in his likeness. Wonderful! I can now live free of the shackles of sin that held me before. Why don't I always? Well I'm stupid enough to still seek the comfort of old ways on occasion thus requiring a continual renewal of forgiveness which because of God's great love and mercy, is always available.
Blood sacrifice is not 'penal'? Well a penalty is a cost, a price. And the price for sin is a life and a life 'taken-in-lieu' is a penalty and a penalty is 'penal'. I can't understand why you and others seem to think justice can be defined as forgiveness without a forfeit. If we, made in God's image demand retribution of our criminals, why is it so awful for the creator to put the price of a life on sin? The great news is that he paid the price himself. Is that really so repulsively awful? Is the God that does this less worthy to be worshiped because he is 'violent', 'retributive' and 'penal'?
The point you make about sacrificial not being penal I find weird. Sacrifice always had a penal factor in the sense that it was a blood price a life price and in the OT this was always an accepted way to show repentance to God for one's own faults, and to enable God's blessing consequent to such an act of worship. It was costly to sacrifice an animal. It is interesting in Genesis to note that when God contacted Abraham, the response was inevitably the building of an altar and a blood sacrifice. The near sacrifice of Isaac as a burnt offering was indeed God's ultimate test of Abraham's faith was it not? and When God spared the life of Isaac the NT states that Abraham received him as one resurrected from death. Isaac thus becomes a perfect type of the Saviour. My point is that while 'penal' is not a bible term as such, yet a death in sacrificial terms constantly implies price and cost.
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
HI JJ. You are indeed saved by grace through faith but your faith is in the efficacy of his blood as an atoning sacrifice. (Ro 5: 9 and 3:25). Grace is based in faith that Christ has died for you and his death involved shedding of blood, taking of life (plod plod) and you are hereby set free from both your sins and your sinfulness because God accepts the life of Christ in your place. He has punished himself instead of you but not only has he done this, the resurrection of Christ also includes us in his likeness. Wonderful! I can now live free of the shackles of sin that held me before. Why don't I always? Well I'm stupid enough to still seek the comfort of old ways on occasion thus requiring a continual renewal of forgiveness which because of God's great love and mercy, is always available.
Well, actually, my faith is based on God's faithfulness, but my salvation is based on God's grace. The mechanism you describe is one way of understanding as to how it all works. I don't think that our faith should be in those mechanics, but rather in the One whom we both agree acted in history to secure that salvation. Our faith is based on grace, grace cannot be based on faith, by definition, as it would then not be grace. The whole point of grace is that it is always initiated by the giver.
I agree asbsolutely that we are set free from our sinful nature by the atonement, but it has nothing to do with punishment.
quote:
Blood sacrifice is not 'penal'? Well a penalty is a cost, a price. And the price for sin is a life and a life 'taken-in-lieu' is a penalty and a penalty is 'penal'. I can't understand why you and others seem to think justice can be defined as forgiveness without a forfeit. If we, made in God's image demand retribution of our criminals, why is it so awful for the creator to put the price of a life on sin? The great news is that he paid the price himself. Is that really so repulsively awful? Is the God that does this less worthy to be worshiped because he is 'violent', 'retributive' and 'penal'?
The word penal does not, as you suggest, merely imply a price or a cost. The words "ransom" and "redeem", words which I accept are appropriate metaphors for the Atonement, imply a cost or a price. Penal implies a punishment. There are plenty of examples of people sacrificing their lives for others without a penal dimension. Is the man killed in the act of pushing a child from the path of an oncoming train being "punished"? Of course not. Yet his blood is nevertheless shed to save another.
As a matter of fact, I don't see forgiveness in the context of justice at all. Forgiveness is pecisely forgiveness because it is not loaded with judicial baggage. It is free and unconstrained. How, then, can it carry any forfeit. If it were to carry such a forfiet it would not be forgiveness. You can't say to someone, "I will forgive you if you do thus and so," because you would then not really be forgiving them.
The reason that we have a retributive justice system is because it is impossible, from our perspective and within the constraints of a fallen world. for us to have a restorative one. We can't bring the murdered child back to life, nor can we heal the horror endured by the parents. But God can do that: He can "unmake" the wrong.
You ask, "Is that really so repulsively awful? Is the God that does this less worthy to be worshiped because he is 'violent', 'retributive' and 'penal'?" The answer is that, if this really is God's nature, how is He any better than humankind. So, yes, compared with a God who does not behave in this way, but rather behaves like Jesus, who was none of these things, yes, He is less worthy.
quote:
The point you make about sacrificial not being penal I find weird. Sacrifice always had a penal factor in the sense that it was a blood price a life price and in the OT this was always an accepted way to show repentance to God for one's own faults, and to enable God's blessing consequent to such an act of worship. It was costly to sacrifice an animal. It is interesting in Genesis to note that when God contacted Abraham, the response was inevitably the building of an altar and a blood sacrifice. The near sacrifice of Isaac as a burnt offering was indeed God's ultimate test of Abraham's faith was it not? and When God spared the life of Isaac the NT states that Abraham received him as one resurrected from death. Isaac thus becomes a perfect type of the Saviour. My point is that while 'penal' is not a bible term as such, yet a death in sacrificial terms constantly implies price and cost.
But death in sacrificial terms is no more penal than is the death of the hypothetical man pushing the child out of the way of the train. I repeat, I accept that Jesus death can accurately be described as sacrificial. That is not the same as being penal.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
There are plenty of examples of people sacrificing their lives for others without a penal dimension. Is the man killed in the act of pushing a child from the path of an oncoming train being "punished"? Of course not. Yet his blood is nevertheless shed to save another.
As usual JJ - fair points to make.
The above example is a commonly used one and worth exploring (I think ).
First of all (ISTM) it shows that Christ's death has to be substitutionary. I know you don't dispute this but I just want to underline the fact. A sacrifice has to be, in some sense, substitutionary.
Secondly, why can't we see the penal aspect as inherent in the world God created? If death is the 'punishment' for rebelling against God, then is it possible to say that any death is God's 'punishment'? God created this world and so why is not okay to see 'cause and effect' also as an outworking of both his grace and his judgment?
John.
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Johnny S:
God created this world and so why is not okay to see 'cause and effect' also as an outworking of both his grace and his judgment?
John, if you are willing to take it that far, and still call it PSA, then this finally moves PSA into territory that is acceptable to me. You are basically saying that any kind of cause and effect related to Christ that influences us is PSA. I can buy that. He did things. He fought where we could not, in our place. We benefit.
quote:
Originally posted by Johnny S:
If death is the 'punishment' for rebelling against God, then is it possible to say that any death is God's 'punishment'?
I wouldn't quite go along with that. Passing from the physical world into the spiritual world when the physical body wears out is normal and always has been. The "death" that is "punishment" is spiritual death, or the lack of life that results from turning away from God - a more fundamental kind of extinction.
While this is what Christ's death was in the minds of those who hated Him, His death was actually very different from this. Not a punishment at all, but a victory.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
Passing from the physical world into the spiritual world when the physical body wears out is normal and always has been. The "death" that is "punishment" is spiritual death, or the lack of life that results from turning away from God - a more fundamental kind of extinction.
Isn't this a sort of Gnostic dualism? (Setting up the physical as 'this world' and the spiritual as 'the other world'.)
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Seeker963
Shipmate
# 2066
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Johnny S:
Secondly, why can't we see the penal aspect as inherent in the world God created? If death is the 'punishment' for rebelling against God, then is it possible to say that any death is God's 'punishment'? God created this world and so why is not okay to see 'cause and effect' also as an outworking of both his grace and his judgment?
My problem is that I don't think you can have grace and justice. One of them has to 'win' in the end. This is the whole problem with PSA; it reflects the human psyche's inability to endure pure grace and really believe that everything is gift (n.b. I have a problem with this too!)
AFAIC, in PSA, justice 'wins' in the end. And I don't want to go to 'heaven' with an angry God who demands justice, because I really do believe that I'm as sinful as the next guy.
--------------------
"People waste so much of their lives on hate and fear." My friend JW-N: Chaplain and three-time cancer survivor. (Went to be with her Lord March 21, 2010. May she rest in peace and rise in glory.)
Posts: 4152 | From: Northeast Ohio | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Seeker963
Shipmate
# 2066
|
Posted
Addendum: for 'justice' in my previous post, read 'retributive justice'. That more accurately reflects what I meant to say.
--------------------
"People waste so much of their lives on hate and fear." My friend JW-N: Chaplain and three-time cancer survivor. (Went to be with her Lord March 21, 2010. May she rest in peace and rise in glory.)
Posts: 4152 | From: Northeast Ohio | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Seeker963:
AFAIC, in PSA, justice 'wins' in the end. And I don't want to go to 'heaven' with an angry God who demands justice, because I really do believe that I'm as sinful as the next guy.
??? ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif) ???
Then you have a problem accepting God's grace then, not his justice?
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Seeker963
Shipmate
# 2066
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Johnny S:
quote:
Originally posted by Seeker963:
AFAIC, in PSA, justice 'wins' in the end. And I don't want to go to 'heaven' with an angry God who demands justice, because I really do believe that I'm as sinful as the next guy.
??? ???
Then you have a problem accepting God's grace then, not his justice?
I don't see it that way. I don't have a hard time with "God forgives". I have a hard time with "God doesn't forgive before someone gets punished".
"God forgives" was always there. The bit that PSA thought was missing was the bit about someone having to get hurt first.
--------------------
"People waste so much of their lives on hate and fear." My friend JW-N: Chaplain and three-time cancer survivor. (Went to be with her Lord March 21, 2010. May she rest in peace and rise in glory.)
Posts: 4152 | From: Northeast Ohio | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Seeker963:
because I really do believe that I'm as sinful as the next guy.
Maybe, but then what has the above comment got to do with the discussion?
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Seeker963
Shipmate
# 2066
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Johnny S:
quote:
Originally posted by Seeker963:
because I really do believe that I'm as sinful as the next guy.
Maybe, but then what has the above comment got to do with the discussion?
Let me try this step by step:
1) Hold on a minute! Salvation can't just be about grace, it has to be about justice too. There has to be punishment of wrong-doing.
2) OK, so we need retributive justice then (and we all know how that's paid for).
3) Now you have a 'justice problem'. Mr. Patel, the Hindu, who devoted his life to good works and to helping many people reaps the consequences of his sinful act of not believing in Christ by being given no option but to be damned to hell. Mr. Jones, who terrorised his own and several families during his lifetime and who sincerely converted to Christ on his deathbed is reaping the consequences of his moral act of converting to Christ by being rewarded with heaven.
Number 3 is not justice. Retributive justice doesn't work. In a world, or cosmos or Reality where retributive justice is King (which is what I think PSA says), all you have is a bunch of people who are wounded, in the process of hurting each other or dead.
Christianity is about grace. As sandalous as grace is. Christ is King. God is supreme. PSA makes law and retribution King.
--------------------
"People waste so much of their lives on hate and fear." My friend JW-N: Chaplain and three-time cancer survivor. (Went to be with her Lord March 21, 2010. May she rest in peace and rise in glory.)
Posts: 4152 | From: Northeast Ohio | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Johnny S:
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
Passing from the physical world into the spiritual world when the physical body wears out is normal and always has been. The "death" that is "punishment" is spiritual death, or the lack of life that results from turning away from God - a more fundamental kind of extinction.
Isn't this a sort of Gnostic dualism? (Setting up the physical as 'this world' and the spiritual as 'the other world'.)
Gnostic dualism? I think that the dualism of "heaven" and "earth" is implicit in the Bible.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
Gnostic dualism? I think that the dualism of "heaven" and "earth" is implicit in the Bible.
Is it? Where does the 'new heaven AND earth' fit into that then?
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Seeker963:
Now you have a 'justice problem'. Mr. Patel, the Hindu, who devoted his life to good works and to helping many people reaps the consequences of his sinful act of not believing in Christ by being given no option but to be damned to hell. Mr. Jones, who terrorised his own and several families during his lifetime and who sincerely converted to Christ on his deathbed is reaping the consequences of his moral act of converting to Christ by being rewarded with heaven.
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
You seem to be confusing PSA with a belief in salvation by faith in Christ alone?
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Johnny S:
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
Gnostic dualism? I think that the dualism of "heaven" and "earth" is implicit in the Bible.
Is it? Where does the 'new heaven AND earth' fit into that then?
The new heaven and the new earth are joined. They are not the same thing.
But maybe I am misunderstanding you. Are you thinking that there is no such thing as heaven? Or that this is not different than the physical world that we see with our eyes?
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Seeker963
Shipmate
# 2066
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Johnny S:
quote:
Originally posted by Seeker963:
Now you have a 'justice problem'. Mr. Patel, the Hindu, who devoted his life to good works and to helping many people reaps the consequences of his sinful act of not believing in Christ by being given no option but to be damned to hell. Mr. Jones, who terrorised his own and several families during his lifetime and who sincerely converted to Christ on his deathbed is reaping the consequences of his moral act of converting to Christ by being rewarded with heaven.
You seem to be confusing PSA with a belief in salvation by faith in Christ alone?
PSA is trying to insert retributive justice into a system that it sees as being otherwise unjust - that God 'just fortives'. Do we agree on that?
I'm saying two things, I think:
1) Your justice is only just in some limited circumstances. Crucifying Christ for the sins of Hitler might feel something like 'justice'. Crucifying Christ because Mr. Patel who helped hundreds but wasn't a Christian isn't justice.
2) PSA insists, as far as I can logically tell, that law is superior to God's grace. PSA insists, as far as I can tell, that God is unable to forgive until law is satisfied. (Perfectly understandable in the cultural context that PSA was developed but equally problematic to me as the problems people find with other theories.)
--------------------
"People waste so much of their lives on hate and fear." My friend JW-N: Chaplain and three-time cancer survivor. (Went to be with her Lord March 21, 2010. May she rest in peace and rise in glory.)
Posts: 4152 | From: Northeast Ohio | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
But maybe I am misunderstanding you. Are you thinking that there is no such thing as heaven? Or that this is not different than the physical world that we see with our eyes?
Yep, misunderstanding. 'Heaven' exists but there is both continuity and discontinuity with this life (according to Paul in 1 Cor. 15).
My point earlier was that you seemed to be entirely separating physical death with spiritual death. ISTM that in the bible they are linked.
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Seeker963:
I'm saying two things, I think:
1) Your justice is only just in some limited circumstances. Crucifying Christ for the sins of Hitler might feel something like 'justice'. Crucifying Christ because Mr. Patel who helped hundreds but wasn't a Christian isn't justice.
I still think you are confusing several issues here. The whole point of PSA is that it is universal, no one has ever said that you can do a like for like swap between Jesus and Hitler or Jesus and Mr. Patel. All our sins, cumulatively, are placed on Christ. Some of us ( ) contribute considerably more than others. Also nobody is saying that Mr. Patel is punished for all the good things he has done. I don't think your problem (on this point) is with PSA.
quote:
Originally posted by Seeker963:
2) PSA insists, as far as I can logically tell, that law is superior to God's grace. PSA insists, as far as I can tell, that God is unable to forgive until law is satisfied. (Perfectly understandable in the cultural context that PSA was developed but equally problematic to me as the problems people find with other theories.)
I thought you weren't too bothered with systematics!
I've never come across any PSA argument that claims that law is superior to grace. That may be the conclusion that you draw but we could have a similar discussion about predestination vs. freewill.
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Johnny S:
Yep, misunderstanding. 'Heaven' exists but there is both continuity and discontinuity with this life (according to Paul in 1 Cor. 15).
Yes. Good.
quote:
Originally posted by Johnny S:
My point earlier was that you seemed to be entirely separating physical death with spiritual death. ISTM that in the bible they are linked.
Yes, linked. But they are not the same thing. the one represents the other.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
Yes, linked. But they are not the same thing. the one represents the other.
Okay, so how you can distinguish them so completely then? (i.e. physical death NOT = punishment / spiritual death = punishment)
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Seeker963
Shipmate
# 2066
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Johnny S:
I still think you are confusing several issues here. The whole point of PSA is that it is universal, no one has ever said that you can do a like for like swap between Jesus and Hitler or Jesus and Mr. Patel. All our sins, cumulatively, are placed on Christ. Some of us ( ) contribute considerably more than others. Also nobody is saying that Mr. Patel is punished for all the good things he has done. I don't think your problem (on this point) is with PSA.
But isn't part of what's going on the formulation of PSA an objection that goes something like: "Hey! Wait a minute! You mean to tell me that if Hitler had accepted Christ, God would 'just forgive' him without someone being punished first? That's not just!"
I thought that was your objection?
I don't think that you can have retributive justice in a grace-based system of forgiveness. It doesn't work. (Restorative justice does work, though. )
--------------------
"People waste so much of their lives on hate and fear." My friend JW-N: Chaplain and three-time cancer survivor. (Went to be with her Lord March 21, 2010. May she rest in peace and rise in glory.)
Posts: 4152 | From: Northeast Ohio | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
And I think, if you can do it right, restorative justice is a lot more effective than retributive justice, in the long run. It's certainly easier to clean up after...
[ETA spelling fix]
[ 28. May 2007, 19:00: Message edited by: mirrizin ]
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Seeker963:
You mean to tell me that if Hitler had accepted Christ, God would 'just forgive' him without someone being punished first?
This is getting surreal. Rather than objecting to it, any PSAer would agree with the above statement ... of course Christ had already been 'punished'
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
infinite_monkey
Shipmate
# 11333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Blood sacrifice is not 'penal'? Well a penalty is a cost, a price. And the price for sin is a life and a life 'taken-in-lieu' is a penalty and a penalty is 'penal'. I can't understand why you and others seem to think justice can be defined as forgiveness without a forfeit. If we, made in God's image demand retribution of our criminals, why is it so awful for the creator to put the price of a life on sin? The great news is that he paid the price himself. Is that really so repulsively awful? Is the God that does this less worthy to be worshiped because he is 'violent', 'retributive' and 'penal'?
<uberSNIP>
It is interesting in Genesis to note that when God contacted Abraham, the response was inevitably the building of an altar and a blood sacrifice. The near sacrifice of Isaac as a burnt offering was indeed God's ultimate test of Abraham's faith was it not? and When God spared the life of Isaac the NT states that Abraham received him as one resurrected from death. Isaac thus becomes a perfect type of the Saviour.
I don't agree. Not to open a can of rhetorical whup-ass on this debate, but when is God more God? When he allegedly tells Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, or when he stays Abraham's hand?
Given that humanity is made in the image of God, I still have a hard time thinking that we are at our most God-like when demanding retribution of our criminals. I think God can do better than that. I think we can learn to do better than that. And I have always looked to Jesus to show me how that's done.
--------------------
His light was lifted just above the Law,
And now we have to live with what we did with what we saw.
--Dar Williams, And a God Descended
Obligatory Blog Flog: www.otherteacher.wordpress.com
Posts: 1423 | From: left coast united states | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by infinite_monkey:
Not to open a can of rhetorical whup-ass on this debate, but when is God more God? When he allegedly tells Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, or when he stays Abraham's hand?
Good point. Genesis 22 could be read either way.
quote:
Originally posted by infinite_monkey:
Given that humanity is made in the image of God, I still have a hard time thinking that we are at our most God-like when demanding retribution of our criminals. I think God can do better than that. I think we can learn to do better than that. And I have always looked to Jesus to show me how that's done.
As I keep saying, a belief in PSA does not mean that we demand retribution towards criminals. Logically, it should demand the opposite. If Christ has received the punishment we all deserve then there is now no need for retribution. Otherwise one is asking for the 'punishment' to be paid twice!
I know a lot of you think I'm mad to do so but I feel strongly that my PSA actively pushes me towards unconditional forgiveness.
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
quote:
Originally Posted by infinite_monkey:
Given that humanity is made in the image of God, I still have a hard time thinking that we are at our most God-like when demanding retribution of our criminals. I think God can do better than that. I think we can learn to do better than that. And I have always looked to Jesus to show me how that's done.
Amen!
The problem is not just a matter of what the specific mechanism God used, it's also a matter of which mechanisms we emulate. If God's model is perfect justice, then we must be called, as small children to their parents, to emulate perfect justice.
And perfect justice does not mean beating the shit out of the resident scapegoat and hanging him from a tree!
ETA:
quote:
I know a lot of you think I'm mad to do so but I feel strongly that my PSA actively pushes me towards unconditional forgiveness.
More power to it, then. I don't think that I'm out to bash PSA, or that the existence of perceived pros of CV necessarily are to devalue PSA. It's just that for some of us PSA isn't really cutting it. To me, CV makes a lot more sense and is much more empowering.
[ 28. May 2007, 19:19: Message edited by: mirrizin ]
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mirrizin:
The problem is not just a matter of what the specific mechanism God used, it's also a matter of which mechanisms we emulate. If God's model is perfect justice, then we must be called, as small children to their parents, to emulate perfect justice.
And perfect justice does not mean beating the shit out of the resident scapegoat and hanging him from a tree!
I don't think you read my last post properly. If justice HAS ALREADY been done, then PSA actually rules out any attempt by us of retribution. Your argument about children emulating justice doesn't stick. If we follow PSA then 'justice' DEMANDS that we treat everyone else with unconditional forgiveness.
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
Why does it need to DEMAND? If this is truly the right and correct thing to do, why demand it? Wouldn't it be self-evident on some level?
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mirrizin:
Why does it need to DEMAND? If this is truly the right and correct thing to do, why demand it? Wouldn't it be self-evident on some level?
Nice one Mirrizin
That bloke Jesus - he didn't need to show up and do or say anything 'cos we all would have worked it out on our own anyway?
You've kind of removed the need for all three of the monotheistic (God revealing) religions in one stroke!
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Quam Dilecta
Shipmate
# 12541
|
Posted
Although I can seldom remember a sermon from last week, I still remember the gist of one which I heard thirty years ago. The preacher pointed out that is seldom possible for human beings to be both just and merciful. Justice requires us to punish wrongdoers; mercy prompts us to forgive them. God alone can resolve this dilemma: he is both perfectly just and utterly merciful. No wonder it is much easier to affirm what God has done than to grasp how he has done it!
--------------------
Blessd are they that dwell in thy house
Posts: 406 | From: Boston, Massachusetts, USA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Seeker963
Shipmate
# 2066
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Johnny S:
quote:
Originally posted by Seeker963:
You mean to tell me that if Hitler had accepted Christ, God would 'just forgive' him without someone being punished first?
This is getting surreal. Rather than objecting to it, any PSAer would agree with the above statement ... of course Christ had already been 'punished'
Yeah, I know.
Sorry, I just find it impossible to see how PSA can be viewed as A Good Thing. I don't see how you can trust a God who operates that way.
--------------------
"People waste so much of their lives on hate and fear." My friend JW-N: Chaplain and three-time cancer survivor. (Went to be with her Lord March 21, 2010. May she rest in peace and rise in glory.)
Posts: 4152 | From: Northeast Ohio | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
Why does justice require punishment? In this instance, what is the purpose of punishment? quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny S:
That bloke Jesus - he didn't need to show up and do or say anything 'cos we all would have worked it out on our own anyway?
You've kind of removed the need for all three of the monotheistic (God revealing) religions in one stroke!
So...was Jesus' purpose to redeem our souls or to teach us ethics? PSA seems to be all about redemption. It doesn't really touch what he said while he was actually alive, except that he came to die.
And yeah, I like thinking dangerously. If I can't think dangerously, then the people who are happy to think dangerously will intellectually rip me to rhetorical shreds. Sorry if that disturbs you.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Seeker963
Shipmate
# 2066
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Quam Dilecta:
Although I can seldom remember a sermon from last week, I still remember the gist of one which I heard thirty years ago. The preacher pointed out that is seldom possible for human beings to be both just and merciful. Justice requires us to punish wrongdoers; mercy prompts us to forgive them. God alone can resolve this dilemma: he is both perfectly just and utterly merciful. No wonder it is much easier to affirm what God has done than to grasp how he has done it!
Well, as you may have gathered, I don't think that God engages in "perfect retribution"; I think he engages in "perfect restoration". But even so, I could accept the above statement if there weren't so many* believers in PSA saying precisely that our salvation is dependent on not only understanding but on on affirming a very particular "how".
* 'Many' does not equal 'all'.
--------------------
"People waste so much of their lives on hate and fear." My friend JW-N: Chaplain and three-time cancer survivor. (Went to be with her Lord March 21, 2010. May she rest in peace and rise in glory.)
Posts: 4152 | From: Northeast Ohio | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
