Monday, December 17, 2007

My wife blogged this inspirational piece

 blog it
Have you ever tried to touch a person behind glass? That sensory experience is lacking in warmth. The gentle touch of a person holding your hand can be so comforting. One of my favorites is the great big bear hug as long as it doesn’t suffocate you. That is a tremendous affectionate gift. We humans thrive on touch. Babies who lack it can die or grow up with challenging issues. So have you ever tried to touch a person behind glass?
She was to arrive soon. The weather was windy, stormy, and wet, very wet. I’d been praying for her safety. Then the phone call came. She couldn’t come and would I go in her stead. I said yes but my heart began pounding in my throat and I felt a cold sweat go over my being.
As I drove southwest, the desert tumbleweeds raced across my vision and the road. I began to worry. Could I do this by myself? My husband was unable to go with me and I was alone, but was I really? My little compact vehicle shivered in the wind.
The large imposing buildings came into my view. The intimidating towers and fences with circular wire intertwined above them, made me feel watched and entrapped. I began to make my way through the parking lot and into the first building. Then I began to have a silly thought about my underwire bra. Earlier there’d be a two-do about the wires. Wires are unacceptable. For a previous visit with others, a sports bra was necessary. This time I was prepared with the right equipment.
As I journeyed alone through the building and into the various sections, passing more buildings along with way, I noticed the starkness and severity of the place. The grounds were tidy, almost unnaturally so.The atmosphere was filled with silence and despair. There was no trash in evidence. The next building was my destination. I entered the waiting room and preceded passed the tables filled with visitors and residents.
In my vision, two glass windows came into view. In front of one, was a chair. I sat down and waited. Would he be disappointed to see me instead of her? Yet as he came through the door, a big grin filled his face. I apologized for my appearance instead of hers and began to jabber and asked questions. Even though we couldn’t hug, I began to feel that our minds and emotions were touching. My eyes welled up tears off & on. The hour passed and then another half. A signal was given. I was thankful for the extra half and hour.
I placed my hand against the glass as he did. Only a fraction of an inch separated our hands. Then it was time to go. I did not know how many years it would be until I touched him again.
After I left, I called her or did she call her me? Whatever, that doesn’t matter. What matters is as we spoke on the phone we both choked up but also laughed as she asked questions. Again spirits & minds touched.
All of us had been touched not physically but, mental, spiritually and emotionally. There was mysterious and yet wonderful satisfaction in that. I look forward to the actual physical touch with him. A great big bear hug that I don’t even care if I am unable to breathe for a time, as long as I get to have the physical touch next year. Then I will be satisfied all over and under.
At times my feelings of Jesus are the same as I try to touch Him through the glass; which is obscured at times, even shadowy and dark. Other times, I have a wonderful satisfaction in the spiritual sense that He has touched me and I touched Him. One day, I will finally be able to see Him face to face, body to body, & finally that long satisfying bear hug with my Friend, Savior, Brother, and Lord, Christ Jesus.

I Corinthians 12:13 “…for we see now through a dim window obscurely, but then face to face;…” (1890 Darby Bible)

Saturday, December 8, 2007

Is penal atonement cosmic child abuse?

Penal substitution is viewed by many today as purporting a violent view of the atonement.Therefore it is also viewed as being detrimental to our perception of the character of God. There are those who would prefer to discard the penal substitution view of atonement and exchange it with a softer more winsome view. I would like to defend the penal substitution model as being the heart and center of biblical atonement. Therefore this model of atonement is the only way that God could rescue sinners and uphold his justice simultaneously. Here is what some are saying about the penal substitution view,

Weaver says,
“To then say that God the Father killed Jesus in order to pay the debt, and that the killing of Jesus is a model of divine child abuse may be a provocative image—but it flows from the logic of satisfaction atonement itself (….) Make no mistake about it. Satisfaction atonement in any form depends on divinely sanctioned violence that follows from the assumption that doing justice means punishment” The Nonviolent Atonement(202-203).

Green and Baker declare,
“Whatever meaning atonement might have, it would be a grave error to imagine that it focused on assuaging God’s anger or winning God’s merciful attention. [….] The Scriptures as a whole provide no ground for a portrait of an angry God needing to be appeased in atoning sacrifice” Recovering The Scandal Of The Cross: Atonement in
New Testament & Contemporary Contents (51).

I found within my reading that the authors who have a distaste for penal substitution, also had a desire to protect God from the accusation that God is actively punishes sin. For God to do so would make God out, not to be holy in their view, but a perpetrator of violence. It is purported by some that for God to be actively involved in punishing people is to open God up to the accusation of not practicing what God preaches, for instance turn the other cheek, (Sermon on the Mount). I do not see God’s active judgment upon sin as condoning violence in humanity, as the authors mentioned above do. God is the only one who is given the ultimate authority to judge, or has the right to take vengeance. The scripture asserts that God does not condone humanities violent acts. When God is angry at sin it will always be righteous anger and God’s judgment will be just and perfect. This is unlike human anger that is always unholy and tainted by prejudices. God never throws cosmic temper tantrums but all his attributes are in harmony with each other (like love & purity). God’s anger and judgment is always just and holy, unlike people who lose control and respond unjustly and without good sense.
God’s laws reflect the very character of who God is, what God loves what God hates they are a reflection of the nature of God. God’s law and the consequences for breaking the law are seen by many as something outside of God control, and are viewed as just the natural consequences due sin ( like gravity for instance). The law of God and the outpouring of God’ righteous wrath upon law breakers is an outward manifestation of the inward nature of God’s love for purity and good. To do away with God’s righteous anger and punishment of sin is to do away with God’s all consuming love for purity, justice, and holiness. God is a person with likes and dislikes not an impersonal force Therefore the very opposite reaction of one who loves righteousness will be to abhor evil and to be angered by it. Packer says,

“Would a God who did not react adversely to evil in this world be morally perfect? Surly not! But it is precisely this adverse reaction to evil, which is a necessary part of moral perfection, which the Bible has in view when it speaks of God’s wrath” Knowing God (151).

God the Eternal Son in His great mercy willingly came to earth on a rescue mission through the womb of a woman to seek and save that which was lost (rescue sinners) (Luke 19:10); (2 Cor 5:19). Sin could not be swept under the cosmic rug nor could it be overlooked without God appearing unrighteous or being looked upon as being a liar, Sin will be punished, God is a loving Father, but at the same time He is a Just Judge. God’s righteousness was called into question concerning why He allowed so many sins in the past to go unpunished. Was God righteous in letting so many sins in the Old Testament go unpunished like David and Bathsheba for instance? The answer to this question is found in these verses (Rom 3: 25-26).
God refrained from fully condemning sin from Adam to this day because He would demonstrate both His love and His hatred of sin through Christ the Eternal Son of God. Christ the Eternal Son willingly absorbed in His own body the wrath due our sins so that we could be reconciled to God. When we look at the cross we should see how terrible our rebellion against God is, and that sin cannot go unpunished. Those who refuse God’s infinite love displayed in Christ’s life, death, and resurrection will face God’s wrath in the future. The beauty of God’s grace shines brightly in the substituionary life, death, and resurrection of Christ for our sins. (John 3:17) For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world would be saved through him.

Tuesday, December 4, 2007

Conception: God kicked Mary from within her womb!


Conception: God became a fertilized egg! An embryo. A fetus. God kicked Mary from within her womb!


Birth: God entered the world as a baby, amid the stench of manure and cobwebs and prickly hay in a stable. Mary cradled the Creator in her arms. "I never imagined God would look like that," she says to herself. Envision the newborn Jesus with a misshaped head, wrinkled skin, and a red face. Just think: angels watched as Mary changed God's diapers! Tiny hands that would touch and heal the sick and yet be ripped by nails. Eyes (what color were they?). Tiny feet (where would they take him?) that likewise would be pierced by nails. She tickled his side (which would one day be lanced with a spear).

 blog it