No full piece today, but some notes.
In the OT, I suppose the justice of God has to be judged by the covenants to which He binds himself. I'll have to think about whether I think there is any sense of universal justice to God in the OT. Frankly, God is God, El Elyon, the most powerful of the gods and the only legitimate God for Israel to worship. In such a case, justice seems to be God's vindication of Israel on those who dare aggress against her. Also God has certain items like His ark or temple or city that you don't mess with or face God's wrath.
God has also bound Himself to a specific covenant of blessing with Israel. In that sense hesed is His covenant people is blessing them when He said He would and punishing them when they don't keep their end of the deal. There are parts of the OT where punishment seems automatic. Uzzah dies apparently without divine deliberation.
But God can show mercy without anyone having to pay the price. There is no sense of penal substitution. The Day of Atonement goat takes the defilement and pollution of Israel away from them, it doesn't take on the guilt. And, in the end, God desires obedience rather than sacrifice.
In the NT, Jesus is a ransom and a sacrifice, but again, the NT has no sense of Jesus paying any mathematical equivalent of penalty. The Parable of the Prodigal Son indicates that God can forgive us on His own authority. His justice does not have to be satisfied legalistically.
Nevertheless, Jesus' death does show that God is just even though He has passed over previous sins. The desire to show God as just is therefore in the mix.
The question of eternal punishment raises the question of God's justice. Eternal punishment is infinite punishment. Is failure to accept God such a sin that justice requires eternal punishment? Perhaps it does.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hi Ken! I only have one question - why did it take me so long to discover your blog?! :) Mine is currently at http://exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com but there is also an earlier version with an extensive archive at http://blue.butler.edu/~jfmcgrat/blog/index2.htm
You mention the "prodigal"...How many of us, as parents would do the same as the Father did in this parable, recieving with gladness the son's return and celebrating that he'd "come to his senses"...? Love does "let go", does not demand obedience or submission, because it respects the son as an individual. And the son must find his way, himself...Unfortunately, some of us would demand payment for the son's disobedience, and forever remember the son's wasting of his inheritance ("not good stewardship")! How unfortunate that we can't learn to love others with "no strings attached"...that does not mean that we run after others when they choose to "go their own way", not does it mean that we don't give them their inheritance, even though we "know" they will be unwise in how they use it...It seems this parable runs against the grain of the prevailing "wisdom" of parenting today!! The parable was, of course, illustrating the Father's heart, not illustrating parenting "skills"! Do we have hearts like the Father?? Are we gracious to "those who oppose themselves"? Do we make the allowance for others to make mistakes? Are we demanding that others see it the "correct" way? Are we gracious in our heart when another does make a mistake and asks us for forgiveness? Are we like the son, who understood the graciousness of the Father, but did not presume upon his graciousness?? What type of "religion" do we teach? Obedience? Sin? Righteousness? or "grace with love"? So, even though we "try" to be just and that is our "goal" to do justly, we never attain to pure or true justice, as we don't know all the "facts" and only an omniscient God can make those claims!
Post a Comment