tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post2742149714217827243..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: How to be a better atheistRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-37823386155297182292013-11-16T19:09:32.960-05:002013-11-16T19:09:32.960-05:00I totally agree that external critiques of penal s...I totally agree that external critiques of penal substitution by atheists don't work. However, external and internal critiques by other theists who reject penal substitution or who are not even Christians (e.g. Muslims) can be more difficult to answer. For example, Muslims argue that penal substitution would involve injustice on God's part since God is allowing an innocent party to suffer in the place and stead of the guilty party. I confess this is a problem that's difficult for me to answer. Some of the Triabloggers have dealt with this objection better than I could. I just didn't save the links to those blogs when I read them. However, one thing I would point out is that in Christianity the standard of justice by which we judge sin, evil and wickedness is ultimate God Himself. God is the paragon of virtue. When we sin, it's ultimately a sin and offense against God (cf. Ps. 51:4). Not some offense against some abstract impersonal justice out there external to God. Therefore, that's why God Himself can decide to take on the penalty of sin upon Himself. In Trinitarianism, when Jesus endures the penalty of sin on behalf of sinners, it's God Himself (the 2nd person of the Trinity) who takes on that guilt. Whereas, Arian and Semi-Arian conceptions of Christology would seem to involve a more problematic form of substitution since it's not God Himself taking on the punishment, but God punishing some other being. True, "Jesus" on those conceptions, consented and accepted that role, but it's wouldn't be God enduring it. <br /><br />And so, God wouldn't be the one who was actually saving. It would be someone (person) and something (being) other than God that actually accomplished salvation. <b>What kind of kind of gospel is it to say, "See how much God loves you, and the greatness of the sacrifice and payment He made for your salvation by sending SOMEONE ELSE other than God to redeem you?"</b> How is that supposed to foster love on our part? It's precisely because God Himself paid the penalty that makes it so wonderful. It's precisely because the Son is so beloved of the Father and the Holy Spirit, being Himself [i.e. Christ] one of the members of the Trinity, that makes the sacrifice of the Son so costly to the Father and Spirit. <br /><br />Given Trinitarianism, it cost the Son to endure the penalty of the sin upon Himself. It costs the Holy Spirit the pain of being grieved by our daily sins (by one degree or another) as He continuously lives inside us (Isa. 63:10; Eph. 4:30). It (probably) costs the Father and Holy Spirit to watch the Son suffer on the Cross. It (probably) costs the Father and Son to watch the Holy Spirit grieved by our sins (even though, in some sense even the Father and Son also resides in us whatever that means metaphysically (John 14:23)). It (probably) cost the Father in knowing that by giving His Son for people's redemption it meant the Son's suffering. It (probably) cost the Father in knowing that by giving His Holy Spirit to sinners, the person of the Holy Spirit would be grieved by their sins.<br /><br />Back to Islam (or other theistic views that reject penal substitution). When Muslims critique penal substitution, it seems to me that they implicitly deny the aseity and absoluteness of God because they are tacitly implying that the standard of justice is outside of God (which God Himself must follow/obey) and that's why He can't decide to take on the penalty of sin upon Himself (Christ) or assign it upon another person (as the Father ordained the Son to do, who Himself is God).<br /><br />So, while external critiques of penal substitution by atheists don't work, it's theoretically possible for them to mount an internal critique of penal substitution and Christianity. However, since it would be an internal critique, they will have for formulate an argument that takes into full consideration ALL of Christian teaching and doctrine.ANNOYED PINOYhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00714774340084597206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-15528567246134569052013-11-15T17:11:12.295-05:002013-11-15T17:11:12.295-05:00Does our system of government provide a counter-ex...Does our system of government provide a counter-example? We all have to live with the consequences, good or bad, of the actions of those who represent us. Bretthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15914126628566132517noreply@blogger.com