tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post5042167666317101889..comments2024-01-24T04:02:06.466-05:00Comments on Why I De-Converted from Evangelical Christianity: What Does Ethical Intuitionism have to do with my De-Conversion?Ken Pulliamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12161943466797514854noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-850511215270749852010-06-16T11:13:24.364-04:002010-06-16T11:13:24.364-04:00Eric,
You say: he is as much the creator of sin ...Eric,<br /><br />You say: <i> he is as much the creator of sin and suffering as of righteousness and joy. </i><br /><br />Evangelicals would not accept that because it makes God the author of sin and thus not perfectly holy.<br /><br />You say: <i> So, according to some exegetes, part of the point of the Atonement was for God to come to earth and share in our suffering. If Jesus was God, then his suffering was perfectly appropriate </i>.<br /><br />Sharing in suffering is one thing but paying the legal penalty for sin is another. The PST says that Jesus legally paid the penalty that was owed by sinful man.Ken Pulliamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12161943466797514854noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-87667750418942997262010-06-16T10:01:13.310-04:002010-06-16T10:01:13.310-04:00I think you're all missing the point. The
Ato...I think you're all missing the point. The <br />Atonement makes a certain perverse sense, insofar as anything in religious doctrine can be said to make sense, if Jesus was indeed God Incarnate. Since God is the ultimate creator and arbiter of all things, he is as much the creator of sin and suffering as of righteousness and joy. So, according to some exegetes, part of the point of the Atonement was for God to come to earth and share in our suffering. If Jesus was God, then his suffering was perfectly appropriate. In fact, he suffered far too little. He could not have atoned for the collective suffering of mankind & animalkind with 3 hours on the cross--or with thousand or a billion hours. Only if Jesus was a mere righteous mortal man was this unjust.Eric Colliernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-83798886314843903532010-06-14T22:40:37.404-04:002010-06-14T22:40:37.404-04:00I've been using that basic argument for quite ...I've been using that basic argument for quite a few years now, and those I confront with it try to get around it with all sorts of apologetics. Apparently they know the mind of God better than God himself does.<br /><br />You are a cringing little Christer, DM, and I laugh at you and your threats.GMpilothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07189308176043748343noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-53245539944410293692010-06-14T19:13:15.285-04:002010-06-14T19:13:15.285-04:00The problem is that personal guilt cannot be trans...The problem is that personal guilt cannot be transferred.<br /><br />Those like Charles Hodge hold that God imputed or simply reckoned man's sins to Jesus but this would be a "legal fiction." You would have the God of truth basing salvation on a falsehood. <br /><br /> If Jesus were truly innocent, then it would be unjust to punish him. If he were not truly innocent, then he would be dying for his own sins. Either way the evangelical has a problem.Ken Pulliamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12161943466797514854noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-35072103922621145732010-06-14T17:43:24.569-04:002010-06-14T17:43:24.569-04:00Have you considered that your fundamental premise—...Have you considered that your fundamental premise—that the death of Jesus was an unjust act—may be incorrect? Jesus’ death was simultaneously an unjust and just act…unjust in that Jesus was innocent of his own sins; just in that he became guilty of the sins of those for whom he died. Indeed, is it not the injustice of penal substitutionary atonement that makes the atonement beneficial for those whose guilt is transferred to Jesus? For only one who is sinless can die for those who are not, thus benefitting the sinner. Otherwise, the sinless one is not sinless and would simply be dying for his own sins. Therefore, it is the injustice of the atonement that permits God to remain morally pure and just, all to the benefit of those whose sin was transferred to the sinless one.TjpwXnoreply@blogger.com