Christ came to reconcile Israel back to God. It is a hard slog to understand that possibly… _It has little to do with us here and now. Many will continue to believe that everything written in the NT is written to us. Dave, you’re a smart guy, love you bro…
I think the issue is two sided. We were enemies of God. God was not our enemy, but he is our judge. His wrath was poured upon us (Romans 1). Christ death got rid of our sin so that we could turn to God. It also got rid of the source of God’s wrath, not by him paying for it, but by Jesus destroying it. Finally God forgave our debt.
ds - I like that, thanks. Who are the ‘we’ that you are referring to?
Chad - stubbornly, I still hang in with thinking that, far from being the end of things, Christ is the mediator of a NEW Covenant - to the entire world, then and now, not just to the Jews, THEY were chosen to glorify God to the nations and bring the world to worship; they failed; in some way, Jesus accomplished what was pleasing to the Father and, through the resurrection the Church, the body of Christ, is now and has been spreading the call throughout the world.
Yeah I’m stubborn. Sorta. Love ya too.
DaveB, I agree with you that covenant is with the world, which includes the Jewish people. This does not exclude their historic identity and purpose in God’s plan. Thus, the we is all of us.
Give him a chance, God is working through our inabilities, and we are progressing mucho and we are advancing…
I’m trying not to get stuck in the ‘fulfilled grace’ thing -because if I understand it correctly, God did something for the ‘world’ that the world did not want. And still does not! To say that the world which is in rebellion against God is simultaneously at peace with HIm - well it makes no sense at all.
God has always loved the world (Jn 3.16), that has not changed - but it seems clear that it is ‘whosoever believes’ that counts - not a legal thing that happened out of our sight, but a real and true return to God in thankfulness for the gift that is waiting.
Are there any quotes from the church Fathers on this? This whole thought seems to be symptomatic of late western theology…
Did your namesake say anything about this? I haven’t read Dunscotus in a while, maybe I’d better go to my bookshelves!
I think that the peace that made with man at the cross, still needs to be appropriated.
That is the big kahuna, But Dave, If you love people and love the way they are, you are the Christ Here And Now… The history of Jesus is incredible, he is the light.
He had more balance than Aquinas (by focusing on the whole incarnation) but I find most of the medieval stuff is too influenced by Anselm. From the little I know Scotus underplayed the whole sacrificial aspect and was less influenced by Anselm.
I think Anselm really led to some great confusion. He really focused on the need for God to pay for God’s lost honor. This shifted the focus of atonement from God fixing man, to God fixing God’s problem.
There is no such thing as God’s lost honor.
You are a interesting person.
Anselm was an interesting guy also - his atonement theory has some quirks in it - like the lost honor thing - but he’s actually good reading if for nothing else than being a big step in the history of ideas.
I was talking about Anselm’s view of the atonement out of which the Penal view grew. Not my own opinion.
Well, my understanding of what Christ did should not be exceedingly deep or troubling. He did what we could not do, God provided a way for free will agents to be in harmony with him = God.
Maybe God did everything that the world needed to have happen. Fulfilled grace is a awesome idea, and maybe if we consider the alternatives, the fulfilled grace idea will begin to take on a new positive view, and we can realize that God is indeed working.
Your question made me curious to look at his theology again. Here is a solid article on the atonement. http://dro.dur.ac.uk/25199/1/25199.pdf
Cool link. I downloaded it and will read it later this evening.
What do you mean by “got rid” of sin? It seems alive and well to me.
What do you mean by “got rid of the source of God’s wrath.” What source? My impression is that God still has wrath, and that there is a coming wrath, and that Paul can still warn believers to avoid it.
BTW - Bob has an excellent short paper on the subject that has been helpful to me. I still have my thick-headed questions, but the paper kept me going in the right direction.
And you can download it also at that link. The paper, basically a review of a book by TW, is an important line in the sand against many misunderstandings.
Just this short paragraph clears the air:
But…we may find Jesus came to fix something quite different, if we see that the continual goal of the Bible story’s is not ability to escape to heaven, but to share in God’s kingdom on this earth (and a future “new earth” -Isa 66:12; 2Pet 3:13). For the diagnosis is not that we need to have a satisfying punishment that can let us avoid the costs of our sinful choices. Instead, God persistently pursues producing a people whose lives will actually reflect His image and character, as we care for His creation and one another.