Tag: reconciliation

Rejoicing With A Pearl Harbor Attacker

Yes. I look forward to rejoicing one day with a Pearl Harbor attacker. Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and talk about it.

I did know that yesterday was Pearl Harbor Day, but I honestly couldn’t think of something to say I hadn’t before. That is, until I got in my car to go home from work at the Seminary Post Office and heard them talking about how long ago it was and how people today are still learning from it and what it would be like today. Then I thought back to something else. I remember reviewing From Pearl Harbor To Calvary by Mitsuo Fuchida.

I don’t remember how high ranking he was, but he was one who was extremely high in the ranks on the attack if not the main one behind it. It was years after the event that he came to become a Christian. This is something even more incredible since Japan is so under-evangelized by Christians. (Can we start doing better people?)

What does that mean? It means that one day, Fuchida will be rejoicing in the presence of God with some of the people whose deaths he was responsible for. It means that any fighting he did in the war against people he considered bitter enemies who were Christians are ones that he will be rejoicing with. It means that their families who could understandably hold ill will towards him and want to see him dead will rejoice with him.

Years ago, skeptics were sharing a meme that I wrote a response to. It involved a little boy in Heaven and Jesus showing him a man and saying “He murdered you and your family while you were asleep, but he’s repented and he’s here now. Let’s go say hello.” Skeptics assume that fear or hatred towards people will reign supreme still.

It won’t be. It’s love and forgiveness. It’s a city of grace. There will be no antagonism. Could people still remember Pearl Harbor? Possibly, but they will see it through the eyes of grace and love. We could say they will even see it through God.

This is a victory that the gospel can bring about. The gospel is about God reconciling the world to Himself through Christ, and the world is certainly opposed to Him. If those greater reconciliations can take place, surely the lesser ones here can. It might seem odd to refer to the Pearl Harbor attack as lesser, but compared to the act of divine treason, yes it is. It is still a horrific evil and worse than many others, but not worse than divine treason.

This is also the great power of Christianity and the resurrection of Jesus. It is His love and forgiveness in us that enables us to live that way towards others. I have said before that I still pray for my ex-wife every night and it is not the prayers of judgment and wrath on her. I don’t wish ill on her, at least not for the sake of ill. I often think that if judgment must come, then in wrath remember mercy.

So yes, one day I will be rejoicing with a Pearl Harbor attacker. If you’re a Christian, so will you. Christian veterans will one day be rejoicing with people they would consider enemies on Earth.

There will be no enemies at the throne. There will only be reconciled friends.

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

 

Book Plunge: Christ Crucified by Donald Macleod

What do I think about Donald Macleod’s book on the atonement? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

ChristCrucified

Paul wrote to the Corinthians that he desired to know nothing else save Christ and Him crucified. Why? What makes the crucifixion of Christ so central? What is it about those six hours on a Friday afternoon that forever rocked the world?

Donald MacLeod’s work is all about this event and what all it entails as he goes through the Gospels and the rest of the New Testament writings. This is an in-depth look at the doctrine of the atonement. After going through it, you should never think about the doctrine the same way and a reading of this got me to realize I need to think about the atonement more seriously.

So let’s cover the positives. First off, the first couple of chapters are just gripping as we go through a brief look at the life of Christ but described in terms of what the events must have been like for the Christ and how He was rejected by the world and His friends and the weight of bearing the sin of the world on the cross.

In fact, I’d say this was my favorite part of the book and if you purchase it (As IVP sent me a review copy and I greatly thank them for that) then this part will easily be worth the whole price of the book. I do not consider myself an emotional person and empathy is not a strong suit of mine, but I still found myself gripped by what I was reading.

Second positive, Macleod goes into great detail on theological terms used in Scripture like Propitiation and redemption and terms we might not think too much about. A section I thought would last a few pages turned out to go through a whole chapter.

Third, Macleod gives an apologetic presentation as well answering questions at the end such as if there was another way. He looks at rival theories that seek to explain the death of the Christ without it being a substitution and blood atonement. He also throughout the book answers charges of cosmic child abuse and other such claims.

Finally, Macleod ends the book rightly where he should, with a look at what this means for the Great Commission. He shows us that by the work of Christ, the devil has been defeated and we are free to go into the world and fulfill the Great Commission.

Now let’s talk about ways I thought the book could have been improved. On a minor point, Macleod is quite sure that Jesus was buried honorably. This is a point that I would contest. This is only a minor one, but it did stand out to me.

Second, Macleod raises some questions about divine impassibility, the idea that God does not have emotions. I found this troubling throughout as the ramifications of God being emotional are problematic as I think it ends up being a deity that is changing and progressing and in fact, dependent on His creation. A few times Macleod points to how it must have been for the Father to see His Son on the cross and at suffering in the heart of God. The theory of the atonement does not depend on God suffering and I found such ideas raising questions that I do not think are adequately answered if impassibility is denied.

Third, I would have liked to have seen more on justification. There was not a whole chapter on it and that would have been a welcome inclusion. Especially I would have liked to have seen how Macleod’s view of the atonement would interact with the New Perspective on Paul. Could we see some interaction with Wright and Dunn and others?

The good thing is that none of these negatives ultimately distract from the book as a whole. You can still walk away with a good theory of the atonement and understand that these are points you can disagree on. The argument as a whole still stands as none of these points are central.

In conclusion, I do recommend the work as one if you want to understand the atonement more thoroughly as Macleod has gone highly in-depth and we owe him a debt of gratitude.

In Christ,
Nick Peters