The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Modernised George MacDonald Sermon - Justice

Same here, this morning I was reading about it on en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substitutionary_atonement :slight_smile:

I mostly talked about it in my notes to the first transcript; although I tacitly mention it at the beginning of every transcript by saying “Most of the preceding sermon can be found here [linking to the previous transcription], while a full version can be found for free here [linking to an American publisher].”

My alterations fell into the following categories:

1.) adding paragraph breaks (by far the most extensive alterations);

2.) clarifying the pronoun trails by putting nouns back in place of some pronouns (and putting divine caps on others);

3.) adding a bit of formatting for emphasis;

4.) omitting a paragraph on rare occasion where MacD goes off on some tangential material that I thought would generate too much technical controversy, distracting from his main point. (This happened very rarely, and I signalled such omission by means of bracketed ellipses like this …].)

At the beginning I think I recall not quoting his scripture referent for the sermon, but that was a stylistic choice. Eventually I started doing it when he began referring to the scripture immediately without subsequently introducing it.

Thank you for posting this Alex! I think this is probably exactly what I needed to hear. So many theologies these days causing me such angst like limited election, atonement, penal substitution as justice, and God’s love that will give up on a great many. I haven’t quite known what to do with my frustrations over hearing such, in my opinion, terrible doctrines. How do I get excited with people in my congregation that are celebrating them? In the end it will all be clear, but what to do with myself until then? As a result, I can really relate to what Winchester is saying about pride and contempt entering our heart. And I certainly don’t want to do anything to dishonor God and cause others not to be able to see his wonder. I probably just need to be silent and find reasons to rejoice with others where I can.

Rline and Alex, I recently ran into this link, about the Christus Victor view of the cross vs. penal substitution, and have enjoyed reading it, especially Part 4. It’s the understanding the cross link to the right.

therebelgod.com/2010/04/subs … hurch.html

Amy, Penal Substitution is another evangelical “sacred cow” which (like ECT) has very questionable roots and hardly any biblical support when you look into it. Derek Flood’s article at www.gregboyd.org).
At the end of the day both PS and ECT should be rejected because they rely on a picture of God more evil than the worst human beings. For this reason alone it is hard to avoid the conclusion that these doctrines are blasphemous.

Thanks so much, Rline, for modernizing “Justice”! It is one of my favourite passages in all of GMD’s works!
I have saved your work, I will treasure it, and will share it with others.

Thanks again!

Paidion

Thanks Paidion for your encouraging words. I also found it enlightening and challenging as I was translating it.

Revdrew61, I got that link from you when I just happened upon it from one of your posts from a long time ago. So happy to have found it! :stuck_out_tongue: Just so happens it’s right around the time I’m reading Rline’s Justice from George MacDonald. They go so well together! What great timing! Your assessment that ECT and PS, both, rely on a not so great God seems to be George MacDonald’s same assessment. I think much of the church has common ways of thinking to keep them in the zone of approving these doctrines. I have not always rejected them, but, the further out I get, I wonder what in the world was I thinking?! :open_mouth: I am amazed that taking a closer look now, especially at the penal substitution texts, they are not so penal after all. Jesus died so that we would be drawn to him, have a righteousness in us, etc. It’s all still a bit new to me so I am still working out exactly what is different about Jesus and his accomplishment for us.

We will probably get told off for hijacking rline’s thread, so, for the record, I love GM’s unspoken sermons too and its great to have them available in modern English! Thanks rline :sunglasses:
And thanks Amy - I’m glad that link was a help. Another brilliant resource for unpicking what’s wrong with PS is a collection of essays called “Stricken by God?” edited by Brad Jersak and Michael Hardin. Several of the contributors are also against ECT. One of them, Sharon Baker, recently brought out a very good book called “Razing Hell”. I think several of the doctrines which are now being questioned came to prominence as a result of Christianity becoming the official religion of the empire, instead of being subversive of empire. So doctrinal differences came to be decided by the sword and christianity was corrupted into a tool for scaring the masses into obedience. If this theory - and I’m by no means the only person to hold it - is correct, it may explain why these doctrines appear so clumsy and inappropriate in a post-christendom world. We need to get back to a true understanding of God’s love and justice… which takes us back to George MacDonald and kindred spirits. :smiley:

Hey revdrew61, I don’t consider it a hijacking! I’m intrigued by the whole thing. I have to confess I feel a little like Neo who comes out of the matrix and wakes up in the real world. For the first time, I’m being confronted with a lot of stuff which I never even thought of. It’s liberating, it’s scary and it’s challenging. But I took the red pill because I wanted to know the truth! To be made aware that not only is penal substitution not the only theory of atonement, but also that it may be completely wrong, is difficult to accept! I do remember in Bible college, though, having a page which listed out 7 different theories of the atonement. Obviously, they took the penal sub view and so I never even considered the others. I might have a look at my notes now…

I’m terrible at hijacking threads and so I was being really careful to draw the link between the article and George MacDonald. :laughing:

Rline, it is scary to consider new ideas. It’s like the ground completely shifts from underneath you. What’s difficult is that it’s not just one idea that’s changed, it’s multiple. I try not to expose all my cards at once because it’s just too much for people to take, but when I get into discussions with others I realize right away where I’ve changed and it’s in quite a few places. This almost legitimizes for the other person that I must be a heretic! Like you, I’m still working it out and figuring out more what it is that I don’t believe, that’s not there like I’d thought.

revdrew61, thanks for the additional tips. Looking forward to reading those.

Discussing PSA seems quite relevant to GMac’s sermon, so no objections from me! :sunglasses:

Sonia

I think many of us here can relate to this picture. Wow! It’s a whole new world. I was blind yet thought I could see. Now I realize I’m just beginning to make out shapes through the dark glass. I’m continuously humbled by it all.

It was MacDonald who first taught me to think that there might be a problem with PSA. I had just taken it for granted. It’s as essential to traditional theology as ECT–maybe more so! Yet when you really think about it–as MacDonald reasons in this sermon–it doesn’t make sense to say that “Justice” is satisfied with the punishment of an innocent person.

But it comes down to definitions of justice. Probably many would disagree with MacDonald and insist that justice requires payment, and that sin, like a monetary debt, can be paid by anyone who has the resources and the desire.

Sonia

Sonia, I know you and I agree so much on this issue and you are stating what others believe, giving them the benefit of the doubt that they just have a different understanding. I have to remind myself of this, too, so I understand where they are coming from, that for them PS is such a great thing. George MacDonald, though, is excellent at pointing out how much justice requires things be set right in a real way, not just an applied way. Of course, perhaps many that believe in PS also believe it’s necessary for God to change the heart. I’d say this is God’s main goal. And a God that’s really into justice cares not that just a few are set right, but that all are set right.

Just reading the thread on the way to the article. The “penal” part of PSA was something that I struggled with for a long time. I found Greg Boyd and printed out his “Christus Victor” to study. We were between churches at the time after I had dropped out entirely for 6 months. My 18 yo daughter is friends with this young pastor and his wife (from church camp), so we visited there and they just so happened to be having a potluck with me seated next to the pastor. I was so excited about the idea of Christus Victor, I wanted to share it with the pastor. He responded, “Greg Boyd’s a heretic” and when I asked him about another of my “red flag” questions he said “Mother Theresa’s in hell”.

The first visit was the last at that church. (I’m sad for him though, that he sees God that way)

Hey all,

It’s great to be modernizing MacDonald’ss works… I became a fan of his by reading his writings as modernised by Micheal R. Phillips. Didn’t know if any of you knew about these, so I figured I’d chime in.

The one book I’ve read the most from is Discovering the Character of God amazon.com/Discovering-Character-God-George-MacDonald/dp/1556610688/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1303998314&sr=8-1.

I don’t know if or how any of these correlate to the Unspoken Sermons series - but there is a lot of really good stuff in DTCOG. There’s another that I haven’t read called Knowing the Heart of God. Phillips has also modernized many of MacDonald’s novels which I have also enjoyed.

-AaronK

Thanks for pointing these out. I had a look on Amazon using the link you supplied and searched through all of Phillips stuff there. I didn’t find any unspoken sermons, so I’m assuming he probably hasn’t done them. So I thought that maybe I should still try and do them all…

Rline,

Phillips modernizes and thematically compiles MacDonald’s works in his books. In Discovering the Character of God, he pulled from a couple different books to create a chapter. A chapter would typically start with a Macdonald poem, continue with an essay/sermon and end with an excerpt from one of Macdonald’s fictional works. Instead of just modernizing a single book, Phillips pulled from many works to give a full literary picture of the themes and thoughts of MacDonald.

When I read the original “Justice” recently, it was as though I had read it before in one of Phillips edited versions - Don’t know which one though.

I’ve put some books on order, when they arrive, I’ll try to give a rundown of what Unspoken Sermons he’s modernized and what book they’re in.

-Aaron

I am happy to finally meet people who are in the same place I am spiritually and reading (and loving) my spiritual mentor, MacDonald!!

I want very much to connect with others who are working on modernizing MacDonald’s unspoken sermons. If doing this work (including partnering with Michael Phillips in the process) is something you are interested in, please email me at jasonbrents@gmail.com.

Hi FreedomFighter and welcome! :smiley:

Nice to meet you and, yes, many of us here also see George MacDonald as our spiritual mentor… :wink:

Would love to hear more about yourself if you have a chance to post something in the “Introductions” section.