- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
QA, you remind me of an old StayLDS member, “Mercy&Garce” mercyngrace wrote:Even the sacrifice and penal substitution metaphors for the atonement miss the point, IMO. The writer of Hebrews seems to indicate that the law of sacrifice was provided to assuage our own guilt. WE need a price to be paid, not God. That’s why He repeats time and again that He doesn’t need the blood of beasts but a broken heart and contrite spirit.
IMO, there was no price to be paid – no law written on stone tables that preceded Satan (our white witch per Lewis’ tales). There is an accuser, our adversary, and whether he roams the earth lying in wait to deceive or exists only in the blackness of our own hearts, he can be satiated and his sense of justice
mustbe appeased. This accuser is appeased, when he comes face to face with one who willingly, and motivated by unadulterated charity, suffers an unfathomable injustice on behalf of another. Then and there the accuser hangs his head in shame, drops his stone, realizes his own culpability, and frees his offender of his just demands. In that instant, mercy claims both accuser and accused. Charity, if they allow it, changes them both. In essence, Abraham stood ready to appease a God who gently reproved “You do not need to appease me. I will show you through the unblemished Lamb, how to accept an offer that has always been extended.”
And He did.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.