Modern Theology 101 - The Doctrine of Atonement

[bling]

Bling, I agree with you on one point: The cross of Christ is certainly a scandal (literally a "stumbling block") to those who do not believe. They find it reprehensible that God would be holy, and thus be offended at sin, and thus punish sin, and then go to the trouble to take that punishment onto Himself.

Eric, that is what penal substitution is.

I often tell non believers: "the bible tells us this will be a "stumbling block" for you.

The whole (PS) has issues. It is unjust, unfair, makes God look weak, and has God sacrificing Jesus.

I developed my own explanation and understanding from much discussion, but I heard there is a new book out with a similar idea that I have not read. Could you explain why you disagree with the rest of my introduction, because I have pages of ideas on this.

[headheart]

.... I have pages of ideas on this.

'ACIM + A.V. is such a radically different way of understanding G_d and salvation, than that of strict Biblical Christianity, and yet they seem to have some very positive overlaps. I am not sure if you are aware of it, but ACIM has been widely taught in Churches, but I am determined to get the most Biblically accurate teaching of 'The Doctrine of Atonement' that I can, in hopes that if urbanmonk, or the millions of others who have/are and will read ACIM, might at least be able to read a clear presentation of 'The Doctrine of Atonment' (with 'propitiation' in mind), hence the reason for this thread.

I hope you are able to assist me in this regard, if not I am sure that others will be willing to do so. '

Sincerely,
Eric J. Sawyer

----------------------------------------------
'Daar breekt de natuurlijke generatie uit geestelijke zaad van Adam door en stelt een nieuwe geestelijke orde in de plaats; de wedergeboorte uit den Heiligen Geest. En Christus betekent radicale vernieuwing van levenswortel en daarom betekent Christus’ verlossingswerk in principe niet allen de redding van den individueelen mensch, maar van heel het Scheppingswerk Gods, dat in den mensch geconcentreerd was.'
Herman Dooyeweerd. (1894-1977)

[RBerman]

The whole (PS) has issues. It is unjust, unfair, makes God look weak, and has God sacrificing Jesus. I developed my own explanation and understanding from much discussion, but I heard there is a new book out with a similar idea that I have not read. Could you explain why you disagree with the rest of my introduction, because I have pages of ideas on this.

Where to begin? Penal substitution is not unjust or unfair. It does not make God look weak. It does have God sacrificing himself. What could be less weak than God offering himself on the cross to bear the punishment which his own holy character demands?

[bling]

'ACIM + A.V. is such a radically different way of understanding G_d and salvation, than that of strict Biblical Christianity, and yet they seem to have some very positive overlaps. I am not sure if you are aware of it, but ACIM has been widely taught in Churches, but I am determined to get the most Biblically accurate teaching of 'The Doctrine of Atonement' that I can, in hopes that if urbanmonk, or the millions of others who have/are and will read ACIM, might at least be able to read a clear presentation of 'The Doctrine of Atonment' (with 'propitiation' in mind), hence the reason for this thread.

I hope you are able to assist me in this regard, if not I am sure that others will be willing to do so. '

Sincerely,
Eric J. Sawyer

----------------------------------------------
'Daar breekt de natuurlijke generatie uit geestelijke zaad van Adam door en stelt een nieuwe geestelijke orde in de plaats; de wedergeboorte uit den Heiligen Geest. En Christus betekent radicale vernieuwing van levenswortel en daarom betekent Christus’ verlossingswerk in principe niet allen de redding van den individueelen mensch, maar van heel het Scheppingswerk Gods, dat in den mensch geconcentreerd was.'
Herman Dooyeweerd. (1894-1977)

I know very little about ACIM and do not know what you are talking about with AV ?
I have come up against UrbanMonk before and he/she are not on the same page. When you say we have "not sinned" than you are not forgiven so you do not Love much. (...he that is forgiven much Loves much...) so that does not help the issue. Forgiven sin is not a problem.

[bling]

Where to begin? Penal substitution is not unjust or unfair. It does not make God look weak. It does have God sacrificing himself. What could be less weak than God offering himself on the cross to bear the punishment which his own holy character demands?

Why is God’s “character” so “weak” that it demands a sacrifice? (The Muslims like to point out that Allah forgives sins without needing blood).

What is the difference between Penal Substitution and the “Whipping Boy” concept?
The “Whipping Boy” concept is considered by most (if not everyone) to be unfair and unjust.

Why does God have to have a sacrifice to Himself, without it sounding like a character flaw?

Is God blood thirsty that He requires a blood sacrifice?

(I am being the devil’s advocate here, but these are the questions I have been asked by agnostics, atheists and Muslims and I agree with their logic, so I have a problem with (PS).)

What is wrong with my alternative?

[headheart]

Please read Post 17 + Post 22 + Post 24

+)The Reason For This Thread(+

'ACIM + A.V. is such a radically different way of understanding G_d and salvation, than that of strict Biblical Christianity, and yet they seem to have some very positive overlaps. I am not sure if you are aware of it, but ACIM has been widely taught in Churches, but I am determined to get the most Biblically accurate teaching of 'The Doctrine of Atonement' that I can, in hopes that if urbanmonk, or the millions of others who have/are and will read ACIM, might at least be able to read a clear presentation of 'The Doctrine of Atonment' (with 'propitiation' in mind), hence the reason for this thread.

I hope you are able to assist me in this regard, if not I am sure that others will be willing to do so.'

Sincerely,
Eric J. Sawyer

[Zguy28]

Why is God’s “character” so “weak” that it demands a sacrifice? (The Muslims like to point out that Allah forgives sins without needing blood).

What is the difference between Penal Substitution and the “Whipping Boy” concept?
The “Whipping Boy” concept is considered by most (if not everyone) to be unfair and unjust.

Why does God have to have a sacrifice to Himself, without it sounding like a character flaw?

Is God blood thirsty that He requires a blood sacrifice?

(I am being the devil’s advocate here, but these are the questions I have been asked by agnostics, atheists and Muslims and I agree with their logic, so I have a problem with (PS).)

What is wrong with my alternative?

While God is merciful and loving, he is also just. Justice cannot be separated from His very nature and demands consequences for sin. Jesus paid the price to satisfy justice.

It's as if you stand in trial before a king and the verdict is delivered "GUILTY!" Just then, Jesus comes forward and says "I will take his punishment so that this person can receive mercy and henceforth serve and glorify the King."

So it was done.

[bling]

While God is merciful and loving, he is also just. Justice cannot be separated from His very nature and demands consequences for sin. Jesus paid the price to satisfy justice.

It's as if you stand in trial before a king and the verdict is delivered "GUILTY!" Just then, Jesus comes forward and says "I will take his punishment so that this person can receive mercy and henceforth serve and glorify the King."

So it was done.

I fully agree God is fully justified and fair. It is I who is guilty, so it would not be fair and just to punish the innocent Christ instead of me? Or do you think the Whipping Boy princible is fair and just?
Please read my earlier post and tell me how my alternative is weak?

[RBerman]

Why is God’s “character” so “weak” that it demands a sacrifice? (The Muslims like to point out that Allah forgives sins without needing blood).

What is the difference between Penal Substitution and the “Whipping Boy” concept?
The “Whipping Boy” concept is considered by most (if not everyone) to be unfair and unjust.

Why does God have to have a sacrifice to Himself, without it sounding like a character flaw?

Is God blood thirsty that He requires a blood sacrifice?

(I am being the devil’s advocate here, but these are the questions I have been asked by agnostics, atheists and Muslims and I agree with their logic, so I have a problem with (PS).)

What is wrong with my alternative?

You did not answer a single one of my questions. If you're not interested in discussion, just say so.

[headheart]

You did not answer a single one of my questions. If you're not interested in discussion, just say so.

RB,
You only asked bling, one question:

<snip>

That is my introduction.

Originally posted by bling:
<snip>. Could you explain why you disagree with the rest of my introduction, because I have pages of ideas on this.

Originally posted by RBerman:
Where to begin?
Penal substitution is not unjust or unfair. It does not make God look weak. It does have God sacrificing himself.
What could be less weak than God offering himself on the cross to bear the punishment which his own holy character demands? <<< Question 1

+)Question 1(+

What could be less weak than God offering himself on the cross to bear the punishment which his own holy character demands ? (RBerman)

Sincerely,
Eric J. Sawyer.

[Littlejoe]

While God is merciful and loving, he is also just. Justice cannot be separated from His very nature and demands consequences for sin. Jesus paid the price to satisfy justice.

It's as if you stand in trial before a king and the verdict is delivered "GUILTY!" Just then, Jesus comes forward and says "I will take his punishment so that this person can receive mercy and henceforth serve and glorify the King."

So it was done.

I fully agree God is fully justified and fair. It is I who is guilty, so it would not be fair and just to punish the innocent Christ instead of me? Or do you think the Whipping Boy princible is fair and just?
Please read my earlier post and tell me how my alternative is weak?

Bling, I think your analogy, (and Zguy28's) (sorry) both subtley miss an important distinction. In both your analogies, the "whipping boy" or sacrificial lamb, or however you want to put it, isn't some "stranger" or some such...It is God himself. A more accurate analogy would be:

"It's as if you stand in trial before a king and the verdict is delivered "GUILTY!" So then, The King Himself comes down off of his throne and says "I will take your punishment so that you can receive mercy and henceforth serve and glorify Me."

Now, I know there are implications here about the Trinity and what not. but we have to put into simple terms what really is Happening. God Himself is the propitiation. HE is paying our debt that we cannot repay. That is the Gospel...the Good News...God Himself has redeemed us by His Own sacrifice. All we do is accept the free gift, that we do NOT deserve. Would you not want to love and serve such a King with your whole life? I know I do....

LJ

[Zguy28]

Bling, I think your analogy, (and Zguy28's) (sorry) both subtley miss an important distinction. In both your analogies, the "whipping boy" or sacrificial lamb, or however you want to put it, isn't some "stranger" or some such...It is God himself. A more accurate analogy would be:

"It's as if you stand in trial before a king and the verdict is delivered "GUILTY!" So then, The King Himself comes down off of his throne and says "I will take your punishment so that you can receive mercy and henceforth serve and glorify Me."

Now, I know there are implications here about the Trinity and what not. but we have to put into simple terms what really is Happening. God Himself is the propitiation. HE is paying our debt that we cannot repay. That is the Gospel...the Good News...God Himself has redeemed us by His Own sacrifice. All we do is accept the free gift, that we do NOT deserve. Would you not want to love and serve such a King with your whole life? I know I do....

LJ

Exactly. Thank you.

[headheart]

LJ,

Thanks for you reply.

Hebrews 2:5-18

Sincerely,
Eric J. Sawyer.

[bling]

You did not answer a single one of my questions. If you're not interested in discussion, just say so.

The only questioned you asked was:

Originally posted by RBerman
What could be less weak than God offering himself on the cross to bear the punishment which his own holy character demands?

I answered your question with rhetorical questions:
Why is God’s “character” so “weak” that it demands a sacrifice? (The Muslims like to point out that Allah forgives sins without needing blood).

What is the difference between Penal Substitution and the “Whipping Boy” concept?
The “Whipping Boy” concept is considered by most (if not everyone) to be unfair and unjust.

Why does God have to have a sacrifice to Himself, without it sounding like a character flaw?

Is God blood thirsty that He requires a blood sacrifice?

(I am being the devil’s advocate here, but these are the questions I have been asked by agnostics, atheists and Muslims and I agree with their logic, so I have a problem with (PS).)

What is wrong with my alternative?

Specific answers to:

Penal substitution is not unjust or unfair.

It is the “whipping boy” principle that no society agrees with, where the innocent is punished for the guilty.
Specific answer to:

What could be less weak than God offering himself on the cross to bear the punishment which his own holy character demands?

You are presenting a weak character that “demands” a blood sacrifice to him, before he can forgive.
I am presenting a God that does not need anything to forgive, but will allow Christ to be tortured and murdered by satan’s disciples to help those disciples and me with our need for punishment/discipline and so we can have the benefits of being disciplined/punished.
I admit it takes lots of courage, fortitude, and commitment to be the sacrifice, but it is to satisfy a demand of God (not my problem but His problem right?).
The idea of God “demanding” punishment is “misleading” for it is: I who insist on being punished for I am guilty, I believe in justice and being fair, I believe a true loving parent sees to the discipline (punishment) for offences of their children, and I want to know I have done the time for the crime.

[bling]

RB,
You only asked bling, one question:









+)Question 1(+

What could be less weak than God offering himself on the cross to bear the punishment which his own holy character demands ? (RBerman)

Sincerely,
Eric J. Sawyer.

You are presenting a weak character that “demands” a blood sacrifice to him, before he can forgive.
I am presenting a God that does not need anything to forgive, but will allow Christ to be tortured and murdered by satan’s disciples to help those disciples and me with our need for punishment/discipline and so we can have the benefits of being disciplined/punished.
I admit it takes lots of courage, fortitude, and commitment to be the sacrifice, but it is to satisfy a demand of God (not my problem but His problem right?).
The idea of God “demanding” punishment is “misleading” for it is: I who insist on being punished for I am guilty, I believe in justice and being fair, I believe a true loving parent sees to the discipline (punishment) for offences of their children, and I want to know I have done the time for the crime.