To: Greg or e who wrote (40498 ) 12/5/2001 5:34:10 AM From: Neocon Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 82486 Well, I am actually not as much interested in the use of the word in scripture, as in the logic of the situation itself. The question is, how is God appeased, insofar as He takes on our sins and dies for us? Even granting the sins adhere to His humanity, it is in virtue of His divinity that they are assumed and that He can stand for us. Can we make sense of the idea of God appeasing Himself, or rather, of the need for God to appease Himself, in order to extend mercy to us? How is it just retribution to stand as our scapegoat? Since I cannot quite make sense of it as a necessary propitiation, I propose something which might fit: that the propitiation is gratuitous, in order to demonstrate to us His righteousness, so that we do not mistake His forgiveness as indifference. In other word, if God had wanted, He could have forgiven us without the Crucifixion, but that He wanted to show both aspects of His nature to us, the aspect of justice and of mercy, insofar as He loved us enough to offer His Son. Now, DMA objected that this would make the Crucifixion symbolic. I am not sure that is the right way to look at it, since most miracles are to demonstrate something to us about the power and glory of God, anyway. Nevertheless, I answered that it may be that the juridical emphasis on the Crucifixion was mistaken, and that the primary purpose was mystical. Christ overcomes sin and death, that we may overcome sin and death through Him. Insofar as He is true God and true Man, He is the first fruit of redeemed Humanity, and, through grace, we become like Him, so that we may eventually conquer both sin and death as well.......