He has't come to the punch line yet. By adopting Barth, he rejects penal substitutionary atonement without engaging it. He claims the substitutionary element but rejects the penal element yet embraces a convoluted sense of punishment.
Speaking as an orthodox universalist myself: that's my initial impression, too, Mike. {s} However, neither have I read him as far as he's gotten, so my impression may be too hasty. That being said, I was amused at how your description (or your last sentence anyway) echoed my initial impression.
2 comments:
He has't come to the punch line yet. By adopting Barth, he rejects penal substitutionary atonement without engaging it. He claims the substitutionary element but rejects the penal element yet embraces a convoluted sense of punishment.
Speaking as an orthodox universalist myself: that's my initial impression, too, Mike. {s} However, neither have I read him as far as he's gotten, so my impression may be too hasty. That being said, I was amused at how your description (or your last sentence anyway) echoed my initial impression.
JRP
Post a Comment