tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32298156.post115834136316429584..comments2007-04-26T02:04:50.954-07:00Sharktacoshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14211582724058718297noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32298156.post-1161621123081399992006-10-23T09:32:00.000-07:002006-10-23T09:32:00.000-07:00cheryl,<BR/><BR/>I completely agree with you. But your argument seems to me to be a relational one rather than a legal one. Forgiveness is a relational term. People are separated from relationship with God. So I think all this is best expressed in a relational rather than legal paradigm. In a relational paradigm I think even penal substitution can make sense.sharkiehttp://sharktacos.com/Godnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32298156.post-1161549727266368112006-10-22T13:42:00.000-07:002006-10-22T13:42:00.000-07:00<B>The reason I object to a legal understanding of the Atonement is not because I think sin is not real, but precisely because I do. Because it is real, a mere legal acquittal will not solve the problem, it will not break people out of their bondage and cycles of being hurt and hurting others, it will not restore what has been lost and broken. That is what we need.</B><BR/><BR/>I agree that a mere aquittal apart from the transformative grace of the Holy Spirit will not change a thing, and like you find such a stress on judicial justification to really miss the point where sin is concerned.<BR/><BR/>But I will say this, man does what he does not only because he is messed up inside, but often times because he is separated from any kind of real relationship with God. Knowing that God loves you, has the best in mind for you, ect. goes along way in restoring that relationship, and thus restoring one's relationship with other people. In other words, for a person, who through guilt, or whatever thinks that God is angry with him, going to send him to hell, or whatnot, an aquittal, that is God's word of forgiveness, can transform that person's life like nothing else.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32298156.post-1158344242779779312006-09-15T11:17:00.000-07:002006-09-15T11:17:00.000-07:00You are a brilliant writer and close to the heart of God. I've been studying Universalism lately and have some feedback on this issue.<BR/><BR/>I object to 'that kind' of Universalism as well. And while some in the Universalists camp do become don't-worry-be-happy Unitarians, this doesn't negate the teaching of scriptures which clearly testify that Christ will save all mankind. He will bind the strong man and plunder his house. He will set the captives free. He will search for and bring back every lost sheep. He will search for His lost coin until He finds it. Christ shows people the Father. If they do not see the Father in this life they will after death when "every knee shall bow and tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father."<BR/><BR/>Sin is very real and Christ offers salvation from it in this world. If we are not saved from it here, it will have to be burned out of us in the lake of fire. Remember the baptism by fire prophesized by John the Baptist and fulfilled in Acts? This baptism by fire brought salvation. Hell is cast into a lake of fire. Those who's names are not written in the Book of Life are cast into the lake of fire. Another baptism of fire. Would it make sense that it's eternal pointless punishment, or a salvific work unto glory, burning away the wood, hay and stubble. If only the translators would translate the Greek word 'aion' as 'age', like they do almost everywhere else in the Bible unless they are referring to God, heaven, or hell. Why do you suppose they do that? <BR/><BR/>Here's my take on it if you're interested. <BR/><BR/>http://joshuaforeman.blogspot.com/2006/08/testing-some-heresies-part-4-so-what.htmlJoshua C. Foremanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17665951353970236871noreply@blogger.com