DISQUS

Mason, I agree that there is some element of the law court setting which begs the question then when will this judging happen? The element of PSA we all have trouble with, I think, is the notion that YHWH demands the blood for atonement. If this is true then what do we do when Jesus forgives sins while still alive. Well the standard seminary answer to that is Jesus blood forgives sins past present and future.

On that point I think we need to investigate sin a little more. Sin as I heard put by Rob Bell I believe is "the distortion of the best kind of life." Or perhaps even better anything that distorts or takes away from ones humanity.

Jesus provided the alternate and ultimate way of being human the way God intended for us. His death was not necessary for this element yet his blood was the substitute for the blood the powers or evil demands of us.

I feel it is hard for us to say that Jesus blood fully atoned for us in that Sin still exists, Sin and death are the last enemies to be defeated. Jesus certainly stripped them of their power but they are yet to be fully judged.

I feel a deeper examination of salvation is necessary but I am becoming increasingly convinced that salvation is the awareness and pursuit of our true humanity where sin / death is the pursuit and actions of things that detract from that humanity. If this is true then Jesus life was necessary for salvation where again his death appeased the powers and crippled them.

God as judge is entirely correct and he will come back to set the world to rights, as Tom puts it, and at that time sin and death will be fully dealt with.

I'd love what you guys have to say about that matter and even the larger salvation picture.

Yes Kurt I have to agree you are on to something as stated. I also like as Dan does how you locked on more with substitution then penal. We certainly find substitution in the bible but not penal.

When I wrestle with this I look more at why this one statement in particular gets people so upset when you disagree with it. Dan and I joked about this on Sunday at our fellowship that all penal substitution theology is, is a strategy to make feel guilty so they need their church thus putting puts in the seats, money for the pastors and feeding the beast all around. So he and I nicknamed now this theory the gospel of guilt. That may be harsh I know.

Since you alluded to the "god's aren't angry" one thing I took away from that is that to say that Jesus simply appeased the wrath of angry God would not have been a new idea in human history. In fact it would have been the very same thing as all the other cults out their. I think Rob's point with that video was if that is all it was then nothing was different, this was just one more god with one more thing he needs for you to be right with him.

So to look at Jesus, as we should always start with, I don't see him making people feel guilty with any aspect of his life or the good news of the Kingdom he preached about. So I LOVE the idea that Jesus substituted the death the powers demand of all of us, thus the outcome was instead of our being in Adam, and old life, we are now in Christ with new life in a way that was not possible until Jesus defeated and took away their power. Hence new life is possible because of the victory of the cross and the hope of the resurrection.

Long live the King!

I apologize on behalf of myself and Amielle for the way the panel came across. We originally had a moderator they had found to moderate who did not show up. So they asked us to come up with a format that would work for just the two of us. So we decided to share a little of our thoughts and then engage with the audience. Obviously it didn't go over as well as we hoped.

Obviously for both of us to achieve what we have in the industry we have to be a step above in professionalism and expertise so I apologize that the excellence that I pride myself on did not come across.

I welcome any discussion with your readers in any sphere of expertise I have.

Keep up the great work.