tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8503927.post2890205644712988905..comments2024-03-16T17:18:50.797+08:00Comments on The Agora: The Atonement Of ChristUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8503927.post-76730215824545870022007-07-07T15:19:00.000+08:002007-07-07T15:19:00.000+08:00Alwyn, since we breathe in an age of individualism...Alwyn, since we breathe in an age of individualism (further removed from the communal/corporate/ collective consciousness of OT/NT times, perhaps it makes us a bit difficult to appreciate how one person cud live or die in corporate solidarity for another.. <BR/><BR/>Say, how would you link something like 'modern law' to penal substitutionary atonement?<BR/><BR/>I do hope the links help w the "counter-arguments" against the concept of PENAL substituion presented, let us know if something fresh comes up. <BR/><BR/>why someone needs to be punished for sins committed in the first place? Hm... That's a tough one. Perhaps Davin point us in the right direction... that God is holy seems a good place to begin :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8503927.post-46861343170509943092007-07-01T01:30:00.000+08:002007-07-01T01:30:00.000+08:00Dave, how would you link something like 'modernist...Dave, how would you link something like 'modernistic individualism' to this issue?<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the links. I do hope, though, that you can continue exploring the counter-arguments against the concept of PENAL substituion presented, e.g. in the analogy you gave about Jow Blow being punched out, I can understand that everything makes sense. <BR/><BR/>Yet the crucial question remains as to <B>why someone needs to be punched out in the first place.</B><BR/><BR/>Will check out the second post (which looks quite comprehensive)...<BR/><BR/>What does anyone else think? in the meantime i'm trying to work out the 'spirit' to write a review to the 4 Views of Atonement - a book certainly worth discussing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8503927.post-68057067286209892032007-06-29T21:41:00.000+08:002007-06-29T21:41:00.000+08:00Well said, Davin! Perhaps it's difficult for us to...Well said, Davin! Perhaps it's difficult for us to grasp ideas like the imputation of guilt and suffering in corporate solidarity of another due to modernistic individualism? :)<BR/><BR/>Dr Leong Tien Fock, an OT prof, gave a great answer to the justice of atonement here:<BR/><BR/>http://theagora.blogspot.com/2007/02/divine-child-abuse.html<BR/><BR/>http://theagora.blogspot.com/2007/02/trinitarian-atonement.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8503927.post-37746066933303547002007-06-28T07:39:00.000+08:002007-06-28T07:39:00.000+08:00Hi Davin...i guess my 2nd paragraph is the very is...Hi Davin...i guess my 2nd paragraph is the very issue in question: should our (somewhat arbitrary and specualative?) understanding of divine demand for restitution be rethought in light of what we know about the pro-enemy teachings of Jesus, and so on?<BR/><BR/>and on that note, I'm actually quite intrigued by Boyd's highlight of a NON-penal substitutionary motif, which requires a deeper look at the OT (he also quoted Goldingay). I think it's possible we've traditionally read too much of modern law(!) into phrases like 'take away our sins'.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8503927.post-88031954688610242362007-06-27T23:24:00.000+08:002007-06-27T23:24:00.000+08:00Hi Alwyn,I'm afraid I've not read the book about t...Hi Alwyn,<BR/>I'm afraid I've not read the book about the 4 views. In any case, at this point in time, I would differ to Alistair McGrath's caution on stretching analogies and parables to the limit. At the end of the day, these tools (analogies and parables) serve only to illustrate a point. Stretched to a limit, they will all break down.<BR/>My respond does however sound like a cheat to escape the questions you raised. In any case, if I am reading you right, you've already answered your initial questions with your questions in the following paragraph. Not sure if I am making sense here. But take a look the last 2 paragraphs of your post. After reading them, my questions to you would be:<BR/>1. Doesn't a just God demand restitution?<BR/>2. Doesn't restitution require sacrifice?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8503927.post-65019661494841711102007-06-25T21:46:00.000+08:002007-06-25T21:46:00.000+08:00I have!http://beginningwithmoses.blogspot.com/2005...I have!<BR/><BR/>http://beginningwithmoses.blogspot.com/2005/10/cross.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8503927.post-65814753117140931272007-06-25T21:23:00.000+08:002007-06-25T21:23:00.000+08:00I've been pondering the whole penal sub issue a bi...I've been pondering the whole penal sub issue a bit: If a judicial system sacrifices an innocent, albeit willing, party so a guilty one can be freed, is that justice?<BR/><BR/>It isn't merely the sacrificial aspect here. It's the fact that an innocent takes on the crimes of someone else. It sounds very noble, but not entirely right. <BR/><BR/>An innocent party has suffered - isn't there something wrong with such justice? What would this say about the system? What does it say about the Judge?<BR/><BR/>Another thing is: Jesus taught us to love ppl unconditionally, even to the point of dying for our enemies. Does this square with the undderstanding that God demands payment for sins against His holy nature? Where did we get the idea that God MUST have punishment, a 'kill', etc. failing which things can't be made right?<BR/><BR/>Anybody else read the recent '4 Views of Atonement'?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com