PSA: Make Your Choice, Your Choice is Made for You

PSA or PST or (P)
I continue to think about the critiques of the Penal Substitution Theory of the Atonement.  Here are my latest meanderings!

The article at this link isn't a defense per se, but it's a good read.  I hope that it could help as you think through your take on penal substitution.

Years ago I wrote a blog post pertinent to sin and redemption, which covers Christology, Anthropology, and Soteriology.  I identify the only two internally consistent rival theological systems of thought in Christianity and a third compromise system.  Most Christians likely fall into the compromise position, somewhere along a spectrum of developed theology.  You can find it here.  The post largely captures what I believe, though I might state things today in a more nuanced way to achieve a greater specificity in some areas or to open it up to more debate in other areas.

Flipping through the dissertation (The Logic of Divine-Human Reconciliation: A Critical Analysis of Penal Substitution as An Explanatory Feature of Atonement by Blaine Swen) has led me to some further conclusions:

• I believe the author is Arminian and develops his theology along these lines.  This means that many of our fundamental premises will differ (I am a Calvinist).  Also see my blog post linked above on why this is an issue.  His reference list is radically different from what mine would be, if that makes sense.
• I am interested in the idea that Jesus appeared to forgive without demanding reparation.  The author of the dissertation does not put a citation in that sentence, but cites a Calvinist presentation in the previous paragraph (a bunny trail here, I follow up in the fourth bullet) (read it here).  As I am a Calvinist, I am interested why a speaker would say something that I would take issue with.  But it became clear to me after listening (reading software!) to most of his speech that we come from different camps regarding the continuity between the OT and NT as specifically relating to the application of biblical law in the NT church (I am a Theonomist).
• In searching for the speech I just mentioned (I found the above link on this page), I discovered a [late] former evangelical christian then agnostic atheist who criticized penal substitution.  Interestingly he also criticizes Philosophical Theology.  I kind of agree with his assessment of Philosophical Theology as he sort of agrees with my position (I am a Presuppositionalist), though he does not perfectly represent it.
• After realizing I was looking at the wrong citation, I edited the second bullet and followed through on the relevant citation. Perusing the Google book, looking up names (Rene Girard ... mimetic desire and scapegoat mechanism ... NO!), and reading the back cover has left me bewildered why the author of the dissertation would even quote this book favorably.  Maybe the philosophies align with his Arminianism.

I truly believe that the biblical approach to be taught is to reason from scripture (theology) not to reason to scripture (philosophy).  There is an inherent danger in attempting to reason to scripture.  I think that all Christians should be shepherded to reason from scripture and only mature Christians should be encouraged to join the great discussion (speaking with the enemy in the gates) and attempt to reason to scripture.  There is the danger of sophistry and making shipwreck of ones faith as Ken Pulliam did.

Make Your Choice, Your Choice is Made for You
As I have reviewed these issues I am reminded that theological camps differ greatly and that premises determine outcomes (if arguments are cogent).  That being said, I don't wish to end the discussion but I would rather discuss presuppositions, world views, philosophical underpinnings, etc.  If you want to know why someone would be a Calvinist or the type of Calvinist that I am, I would love to discuss it.  Anything else is window shopping (as opposed to "how did the product get there?").  Choosing your theological camp largely determines your theological positions with regard to specific doctrines.  That sounds like a tautology.  But my point is to say that arguing which building has the greater structural integrity without discussing foundations is futile.

Delaying Moving for Seminary, Maybe Indefinitely

We have made the decision to stay in Washington state for the time being.  That time could be one year or indefinite.  We don't really know.  What we do know is that as a family we are not ready to go into the crucible that is seminary.  It is a crucible because it would involve three years of intense study, little disposable income, homeschooling challenges in PA, challenges regarding housing, and maybe a few more things that do not readily come to mind.

I think that deciding to deny myself something I've wanted to pursue since I was 18 years old is wise.  It is wise because it is the best choice for my family.  It is also wise because God has called me to minister in our local context. 

First, I have been called to minister to my family.  I have recently taken over the finances and am paying off our debts as well as starting to set up budgets and spending plans that will be forward looking rather than merely resolving day to day needs.  I was not able to serve my family in this way during my navy days.  I have been out of the navy for four years now and we are in a position where I can now do this.  I am also the primary disciplinarian in my home.  If I focus more on my studies, I will focus less on the nurture of my children.  This is only natural.  But what is better, four classes at a time that max out my ability to focus or one class at a time which raises a challenge but allows for focus on the nurture and care of a large family with several young children?

Second, I have been called to minister in my parish and diocese.  Ministering to youth and families is the closest to my heart in terms of passion and calling.  I have a strong sense of informal calling to a parish that is experiencing the addition of energetic families and young couples.  I may also have a formal calling; we will see if it comes to fruition.

Third, there is the general calling and admonition given to all Christians in the Great Commission.  We have spent six years here and are building community.  We have many connections through church, work, and homeschooling.  We want to get more involved in responsibly sourcing our food.  That involves purchasing grass fed beef, buying from local food coops, and starting to experiment with growing some of our own food!  I want to transition to working from home.  We'll see if this one pans out, but it has already provided opportunities to talk to people and hone my skills in writing.  Just the other day I was reading On Writing Well while waiting for my eye exam.  The optometrist took down the title of the book because he also has an interest in writing!  These connections are built over time.  Entrepreneurship is a way to serve the people.  A career in writing does just that.  It is also a way to influence people.  Preaching the Gospel isn't merely an exercise in spewing facts or logic, though it may include those aspects, but it is an opportunity to create fresh and vivid vision with words that people can readily accept and cling to as if their lives depend on it; they surely do.

Why leave?  Why leave when everything that I truly feel called to do is staring at me in the face?  My work is cut out for me.  If I fail it is because I knew what the right thing to do was, but I didn't do it.