tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4669291590397336050.post3176411014417597227..comments2023-11-20T01:10:41.810-06:00Comments on Seeking the truth...: The Curse and the Rupture Part 2Marcus Maherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07729718021822471179noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4669291590397336050.post-61455711864713984262011-02-07T09:32:47.981-06:002011-02-07T09:32:47.981-06:00BTW, danny, I'd love to see you post something...BTW, danny, I'd love to see you post something related to Revelation.<br /><br />I think too, that I might write another post on this issue, specifically as it relates to the atonement, to give everyone more clarity as far as what I think. Look for that sometime this week. :)Marcus Maherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07729718021822471179noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4669291590397336050.post-72867815398458567242011-02-04T11:06:19.266-06:002011-02-04T11:06:19.266-06:00I think you bring up good points, thank you. Yes m...I think you bring up good points, thank you. Yes my definition of penalty was too narrow and yes it is because that's the way penalty is typically understood. Yes, I think the term penalty can be still used if defined clearly - good point. Part of me thinks that the term penalty is too negative, though. Under the heading of atonement I'd like to see the positive (restorative) aspects discussed as well. <br /><br />Yes, my issue is that many evangelicals only focus on the first and yes the penalty is much broader.Marcus Maherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07729718021822471179noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4669291590397336050.post-10318929237565348582011-02-04T08:16:36.634-06:002011-02-04T08:16:36.634-06:00Oh, I have so many comments! This is good stuff, ...Oh, I have so many comments! This is good stuff, and I appreciate you undertaking this with some space limitations.<br /><br />Your second paragraph is where I have some questions, though not necessarily because I think you're wrong. I don't have a problem with saying the primary end of the atonement is to pay the penalty for our sins, but I think you're defining "penalty" too narrowly here. Well, maybe that's because many people do. Let me explain as best I can what I'm thinking.<br /><br />The penalty for sin is the rupture (good word) of relationships- all three you mention here. Or maybe you wouldn't say "penalty," I don't know. So, if the chief end of the atonement is to pay for sins, then the reversal of those ruptures is the outcome. <br /><br />So is your problem that evangelicals tend only to focus on one of those 3 relationships (man & God)? So your problem isn't really the view that Christ's death pays the penalty, but that the penalty is broader than many think. Right?<br /><br />I hope this makes sense. I may post something on BBG regarding this topic and the book of Revelation, because I see the same stuff there. But I'll wait to see if you write more.<br /><br />Good stuff!dannyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03969731898965656137noreply@blogger.com