JD Walters said...
"I'm not sure about 25 words or less, but very briefly: the death part of the Incarnational narrative was necessary so that Christ could truly claim to be the one sinned against in all our transgressions against each other, and thus the one who can genuinely forgive us for our crimes against each other. Remember the principle that only the victim of an injustice can truly offer forgiveness to the perpetrator. In order for Christ to be the true victim of all that injustice, he actually had to have that injustice inflicted upon him. To use the rape analogy, he had to make it so that whenever anyone is raped, he's actually the one being raped."
i) I don't see how that follows, even in terms of Mosaic penology. If, under the Mosaic law, you committed murder, the murder victim wasn’t the only wronged party. The surviving family members were also wrong by that action.
ii) But even if the survivors forgave the murderer, that doesn’t mean he was thereby acquitted in the eyes of the law. He was still liable to capital punishment.
iii) God can forgive those whom we refuse to forgive.
iv) God can still judge those whom we forgive.
Say a woman who suffers from battered-wife syndrome forgives her abusive husband (or boyfriend). Does God thereby forgive him? Does he rubberstamp her action?
Conversely, if an atheist can’t his son for becoming a Christian, does God withhold forgiveness as well? Are his hands tied?