A few theologians (and philosophers) in recent years are finally warming up to the illuminating significance of “gift,” “excess,” “superfluity,” “abundance,” etc., in their connection to the fruit of Christ’s achievement and the operation of the Holy Spirit. But no one so far appears to have connected it unequivocally to the super-compensatory nature of God’s premial justice toward the worthiness of Christ’s faithful obedience during his earthly career. Yet without this ultimate rationale, their asseverations seem to lack sufficient, or at least sufficiently persuasive, grounds. They seem to float or hang in suspension, insufficiently integrated with other vital components of God’s premial project in that resounding News from 30 A.D. [7/8/11]
How could the Lord Jesus Christ possibly have “paid” our “debt” of sin to God since God “owns” everything anyway? Put this way, of course (as countless voices have vainly protested, evidently, and for multiplied generations!), the question itself sounds silly. Yet if God lacks for absolutely nothing good but is instead the source and spring of all that is created, then what “payment” does He need either from us directly or from a substitute? We shouldn’t be surprised, then, that Scripture never represents God as requiring or even being pleased with any postulated “payment” from anybody for sins, but instead as FORGIVING, PARDONING, or RELEASING them from their wrongs, by His graciousness (for His precious Son’s worthy sake) expressed toward anyone who sincerely repents and trusts Him for it. Duh (respectfully)! [7/10/11]
Without the velcro of a correct systematic understanding of the atonement, many a true exegetical insight has gotten detached and then drifted off untethered into the ether of outer space, sadly forgotten, never properly or fairly recaptured and repatriated. Only the correct explanation will provide the adhesive that can bond the valid particulars of scattered exegetical findings into a coherent and integral whole, where each distinct term and passage is given its due. The premial focus of God’s justice in relation to atonement renders illuminating justice also to the diverse contexts that treat the topic. But don’t take my word for it! [7/11/11] (But even so, please don’t neglect to consider my “Theses for the Reconstruction of Ancient Historic Christian Atonement Doctrine” at the top of this blog site. [11/22/24])
The Lord Jesus Christ pinned to a cross was God’s sacrifice, His offering, His offer of forgiveness, not only to the self-righteous nation of Israel, not only to the oppressive Romans, but to every nation without discrimination. For this grim spectacle constituted His unmistakable demonstration of non-retaliation! And as if that were not enough, on the third day hence, instead of carrying out the well-deserved avenging of His Son’s precious blood at the guilty hands of his slayers, God, his father, set His own stamp of hearty approval on that gracious behavior by RAISING JESUS BACK TO LIFE, AWARDING HIM A VAST OVERFLOW OF SURPLUS GLORY, POWER, AUTHORITY, WEALTH, AND MORE! This “graciousness in exchange for graciousness” (John 1:16) sets the pace for a responsive human emulation during the remainder of this age…yes, and far, far beyond! [7/11/11]
MUSLIMS HAVE US DEAD TO RIGHTS!
Intelligent, educated Muslims ask penetrating questions about the “atonement” that orthodox Evangelicals are hard pressed to answer to their satisfaction. “Why did Jesus ‘have to’ die?” is a stumper. By now, we all can parrot the ‘right’ response as if from a catechism: because our sins “had to” be “paid for” in order to “satisfy God’s justice” and “appease His wrath“—or perhaps “restore His honor,” as in the older, more Anselmian, iteration—understood as “having to” suffer the punishment/penalty for our sins as a “substitute” because God “has to” punish every particle of sin one way or another, whether directly or vicariously. Rubbish (can’t you smell it?). This dubious solution, however, is full-on illusory, not to say morally offensive to anyone’s best sense of justice and sound conscience. It is only perpetuated on the ruse that it’s because God “loves” us that He was willing to be satisfied with a substitute instead of punishing wrongdoers directly. But where does rewarding or premial justice show up in all this chatter? Where is the logic of dozens of Psalms reflected in such hyper-vengeful sentiments? Embarrassingly, nowhere at all. [7/15/11]
The Premial Atonement 