1. Some very good post-election thoughts by an African American pastor, Eric Redmond:
4. Michael Crichton dies:
5. Ligon Duncan has some thoughts on prayer after the presidential election:
6. Video of the Week (I’m amazed!):
7. Dave Barry is always good for a laugh. Here is his post-election column:
8. Watch Bruce Ware and Wayne Grudem debate Tom McCall and Keith Yardell on the topic, “Do relations of authority and submission exist eternally among the Persons of the Godhead?”
9. Zach Lind has a two-part video interview with Rob Bell:
10. Greg Boyd writes about a recent debate he had about Open Theism, which turned to a debate on atonement. Following the debate, Boyd notes a conversation he had with the moderator, the substance of which I found surprising:
It turned out that Adam, who had defended the view that Jesus’ work on the cross appeased the Father’s wrath, agreed with me that the Father wasn’t wrathful toward Jesus. It’s just that God’s wrath against sin was expressed by him delivering Christ up to the Powers in our place. Sin was judged and Christ was our substitute — hence, Penal Substitution. Adam informed me that this is basically the view of Karl Barth, expressed in his Church Dogmatics (which I will now certainly have to look into). Well, I replied, if that’s what you mean by the Penal Substitution view of the atonement, consider me a card carrying member!
And notice, this version of Penal Substitution is not only compatible with the Christus Victor view of the atonement (the view that the main thing Jesus did on Calvary was defeat the devil and free us from his oppression): it actually presupposes it. So, without retracting any of my criticism of the view that God needs to vent his wrath against Jesus in order to forgive us, maybe I can now espouse a Christus Victor Penal Substitution view of the atonement.