Cur Deus Homo I-III

Internet Medieval Source Book. ^ | A.D. 1097-1100 | Saint Anselm of Canterbury

[HarleyD]

And As I asked HarleyD if annalex had said "Calvin" instead of "Calvinist", then what?

I was not the one who raised the "Calvinist" issue. I personally don't believe in Caucus threads nor excluding individuals from any subject except where a person is being irreverent. I believe we are responsible to God for discussing all issues about our faith. This is the way that God intends for us to grow.

That being said, I do respect others for wishing to focus on the nuances of particular issues without getting pounded upon by those outside a particular belief. I try to avoid those threads or limit my comments to understanding the view. Having the word "Caucus" in the title helps me; but it will be a sad day when we start labling everything "caucus".

[Mad Dawg]

Yeah, I messed up.

Thanks for your post.

[Mad Dawg]

Can you do a "blood atonement in 25 words or less (fewer)?

I mean like:

1 Classic or Dramatic: Jesus womps the devil and death.

2 Exemplary: Jesus overcomes our separation from God by Showing who God is and what He wants and how we can give it to Him.

3 Propitiatory: Man owes God a debt he cannot pay, an obedient life. Jesus by His life pays that debt and by his death pays our debt.

4 Expiatory: The Blood of Christ shed on the Cross supplies our deficiency ("... for the blood is the life ...") and makes divine life (in all its fullness - moral as well as 'vital') available to us. (okay, that's more than 25 words. Guess which line of thought intrigues me the most.)

5 Ransom (maybe related to 3 or 4): By sinning Man sold himself to the devil -- we owe the devil a life (this is the White Witch's argument in "The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe" -- then Aslan pays the debt and then womps the White witch -- see (1) above.) (does whomp have an 'h'?) and Jesus pays our debt.

I'm afraid I have a classics comix mind and tidy (glib?) summaries help me understand, or at least approach, the complexities which underlie them.

And for those who are keeping score, I think all of these are true, none is true enough.

Even the much despised exemplary has merit. I kinda thought strength involved, you know, guns and muscles and money. I thought happiness involved, well, babes and bourbon. Come to learn strength is like a baby in a barn or a man pinned back like a frog in a dissecting pan, and divine bliss is a voice crying, "Why have you forsaken me?" I learn I don't know diddley, which helps me turn to God with an urgent request for assistance in radical metanoia -- Clean up! Demented sinner in aisle 4!
Exemplary won't get me there, but it might get me off my behind.

[annalex]

I do respect others for wishing to focus on the nuances of particular issues

This is why I insist on caucus designation. I expressly invited everyone to comment, but I want to avoid the thread devolving into a generic ecumenical brawl like those marathon thread (which serve their purpose).

[HarleyD]

This is why I insist on caucus designation.

You need to be cautious about comparing/contrasting other views in a critical light on a caucus forum. This is a difficult thing to do.

[annalex]

I tried my best to avoid a “critical light” in this instance. Now one has pointed to me where the criticism was.

[Mad Dawg]

tin-Foe! Affirmativaroonie! But I think with notable exceptions that we are doing a nice job and playing nicely here (you filthy Calvinist, you ....) and I'm grateful to you because it's largely your doing.

I'm dying to get your feedback on my Child's Garden of Atonement theories.

[Religion Moderator]

It doesn't matter whether or not the comment on a caucus thread, concerning another confession, was critical or not. If it raises any issue that the other confession has an interest in addressing - then either the post must be removed or the thread must be opened.

Only purely factual statements can avoid this, e.g. that Joseph Smith was a real person.

For instance, when the comment is about a doctrine and says that the other confession believes this or that, it doesn't matter how well sourced or self-evident it might be - or even if the other side would disagree. If the other confession has an interest in speaking to the comment, it will be honored.

[HarleyD]

Can you do a "blood atonement in 25 words or less (fewer)?

You're talking to a Reformer. Have you known any of us to say anything in 25-words that we didn't take 250-words to explain? :O)

But I'll try:

Hbr 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

I'll confess. I didn't write it.

[annalex]

OK. So, if I said “This translation was used to draw a distinction and exclude the doctrine of limited atonement” it would have been fine, but since I used “Calvinism” instead of “limited atonement”, that pierced the caucus protection?

[Religion Moderator]

Exactly.

[Mad Dawg]

Hmmmm. It DO have a familiar ring to it ...

oyu wanna see if it shoehorns - or, rather, why it doesn't into my "expiation/sacrifice" category?

I think a very powerful phrase about blood and atonement is "washed in the blood of the lamb" -- and what I think about again is that it seems in the Levitical system that the blood of the sacrifice is about sort of releasing or making available the life of the sacrifice - as if we didn't have enough life in us. Further there is the covenantal use of blood, to sprinkle on the people and on the altar - we are united in the blood of the sacrifice.

I'm just sort of reporting images here, trying to circle around the idea, and see what it looks like from various vantage points. And certianly Hebrews is the letter to go to for this stuff. What a great letter!

[pharmamom]

Please ping me with future installments. I am an infant Orthodox. Thanks!

[annalex]

keep alive