What makes you think I’m against punishment? In some ways, I’m even more for it (as hard as that is to really be - especially when applied to me) than die hard detractors are. They only want punishment (of others) to take place just for it’s own sake! MacDonald raises punishment to a new level, seeing it as something positive happening for redemption’s sake! And that God will spare no punishment necessary, including hell fire itself, to have the children clean and free of their sin. In many ways, this atonement theology is much scarier than some of the more ‘normal’ sort. The normal sort has us using Jesus as a “get out of jail free” card away from any consequences for my sin. No judgment, no suffering necessary - all of that is only for those reprobate ones over there. In contrast to that, is the realization that all of us face a baptism of refining fire. Not a pleasant thought. So it’s no wonder that these atonement views haven’t been popular. Much more comfortable for me to think I’m airlifted by Christ out of all judgment or consequences of my own sin … so long as I can maintain the delusion that I’m one of the good ones.
And that’s what you call theologizing 
I was fond of Sproul who said everybody is a theologian, it’s just not that everybody is a good theologian. N.T. Wright has a perspective that combines a couple different views on eternal punishment. It’s a difficult subject no doubt.
I detect a hint of theologizing here… but I’m sure my theologizing sensor needs to have its calibration checked (not that it’s necessarily off ; - ):
I guess call it what you will. Do I detect its use here as a pejorative? Or at least a label that connotates a suspicious thing to be held at arm’s length?
As for me, I just see it as MacDonald paying attention to the demands of love and discipleship … obedience to Christ himself. Since MacDonald use the term “theologizing” in that same suspicious (at best) way that it sounds like you’ve picked up on, I’m guessing he wouldn’t say that’s what he’s all about.
(109) Penal Blindness
Let us try to understand what the Lord himself said about his parables. It will be better to take the reading of St. Matthew xiii. 14, 15, as it is plainer, and the quotation from Isaiah (vi. 9, 10) is given in full—after the Septuagint, and much clearer than in our version from the Hebrew:—in its light should be read the corresponding passages in the other Gospels: in St. Mark’s it is so compressed as to be capable of quite a different and false meaning: in St. John’s reference, the blinding of the heart seems attributed directly to the devil:—the purport is, that those who by insincerity and falsehood close their deeper eyes, shall not be capable of using in the matter the more superficial eyes of their understanding. Whether this follows as a psychical or metaphysical necessity, or be regarded as a special punishment, it is equally the will of God, and comes from him who is the live Truth. They shall not see what is not for such as they. It is the punishment of the true Love, and is continually illustrated and fulfilled …
This will help to remove the difficulty that the parables are plainly for the teaching of the truth, and yet the Lord speaks of them as for the concealing of it. They are for the understanding of that man only who is practical—who does the thing he knows, who seeks to understand vitally. They reveal to the live conscience, otherwise not to the keenest intellect—though at the same time they may help to rouse the conscience with glimpses of the truth, where the man is on the borders of waking.
Excerpted from Project Gutenberg (the regular site is having trouble loading this morning) from the sermon: “The Last Farthing”
By George, I think he has it exactly right. What a clever place for God to work. This way He can have entirely independent others with whom to relate AND also progress toward seeing His will done. It doesn’t render us into zombie hosts but rather inserts the subtlest of gifts where they might help us gain in the divine perspective.
Boy I can’t afford to stay away from this thread s couple days without missing the biggest of pearls.
How else is He to show divine favoritism?
I see what you did there. You know I’m going to have to steal that, right?
Favoritism is one of the trigger words/concepts of humanity all up and down history. It’s amazing to me that the scripture writers were as free with that attribution (given to God) as they were, given that in human hands, it never ends well. And how much (or whether or not) it actually is a tool of God’s could be a matter of some debate. But I think in the end, it is also recognized in scriptures for what it is: a temptation to be shunned. We are asked to not show partiality or favoritism, so … it should be a foregone conclusion that ultimately, God wouldn’t be doing that either.
Thanks for sharing that insight. For all our talk and debate over ‘free will’ that spans so many different threads around here, this is a good reminder that the tip of our mental iceberg that’s even just accessible to our conscious will and self-reflection, is probably but a small part of everything actually going on in there underneath that much-celebrated surface. And all of that subconscious formational stuff would quite precede any operations that our presumed free will undertakes.
Exactly! Which, in spite of our free (or at least conditionally free) will renders us dependent on something more which cannot itself be subsumed under that will.
I think it is something that Jesus would tell you to be careful about.
(110) The Same (following on the heals of the last excerpt)
Ignorance may be at once a punishment and a kindness: all punishment is kindness, and the best of which the man at the time is capable: ‘Because you will not do, you shall not see; but it would be worse for you if you did see, not being of the disposition to do.’ Such are punished in having the way closed before them; they punish themselves; their own doing results as it cannot but result on them. To say to them certain things so that they could understand them, would but harden them more, because they would not do them; they should have but parables—lanterns of the truth, clear to those who will walk in their light, dark to those who will not. The former are content to have the light cast upon their way; the latter will have it in their eyes, and cannot: if they had, it would but blind them. For them to know more would be their worse condemnation. They are not fit to know more; more shall not be given them yet; it is their punishment that they are in the wrong, and shall keep in the wrong until they come out of it. ‘You choose the dark; you shall stay in the dark till the terrors that dwell in the dark affray you, and cause you to cry out.’ God puts a seal upon the will of man; that seal is either his great punishment, or his mighty favour: ‘Ye love the darkness, abide in the darkness:’ ‘O woman, great is thy faith: be it done unto thee even as thou wilt!’
Excerpted from Project Gutenberg (the regular site is having trouble loading this morning) from the sermon: “The Last Farthing”
Me, too. I have so much to catch up on.
(111) Agree with the Adversary Quickly
What special meaning may be read in the different parts of magistrate, judge, and officer, beyond the general suggestion, perhaps, of the tentative approach of the final, I do not know; but I think I do know what is meant by ‘agree on the way,’ and ‘the uttermost farthing.’ The parable is an appeal to the common sense of those that hear it, in regard to every affair of righteousness. Arrange what claim lies against you; compulsion waits behind it. Do at once what you must do one day. As there is no escape from payment, escape at least the prison that will enforce it. Do not drive Justice to extremities. Duty is imperative; it must be done. It is useless to think to escape the eternal law of things; yield of yourself, nor compel God to compel you.
As found in MacDonald’s sermon: “The Last Farthing”
My uncle had a similar saying: “A job worth doing over is worth doing right the first time.”
I’ve certainly tested and proven that saying right more than once and so do not mean to do any further testing.
So many of MacDonald’s exhortations are hard for me to hear. Regarding procrastination, my sins are legion. I just throw up my hands and (on a good day) - commit myself to getting at least this or that nagging little thing done, knowing that I’ve left far more undone. The well-lived life of somebody who has so ordered everything that they lay their head down at night with everything in its place, all work stowed, cleaned up, and advance preparations for anticipated labor of tomorrow or next week satisfyingly launched - that is a fantasy life. My life is more like daily triage.
I don’t procrastinate – I do what the airlines do. It’s called Delay Management.
(112) The Inexorable.
No, there is no escape. There is no heaven with a little of hell in it–no plan to retain this or that of the devil in our hearts or our pockets. Out Satan must go, every hair and feather!
As found in MacDonald’s sermon: “The Last Farthing”
(113) Christ Our Righteousness
Christ is our righteousness, not that we should escape punishment, still less escape being righteous, but as the live potent creator of righteousness in us, so that we, with our wills receiving his spirit, shall like him resist unto blood, striving against sin; …
As found in MacDonald’s sermon: “The Last Farthing”
I find this M’s most hopeful bit so far!