Jesus and the Cross - Theories of Atonement

Jesus is NOT the Cross

     Why did Jesus, the centerpiece of Christianity die?  It's interesting how many people believe that the cross was the way Jesus paid our debt to God (or the Devil). There is absolutely no doubt that Jesus died for our sin. But some people think He died because of our sins and some think He died to forgive our sins.  There is a distinct separation between the two and there is no shortage of people ready to speculate on them.  Some say Jesus paid our debt to God, others say He paid the Devil, and still others say He led by example.  These ideas have been debated throughout history, but one idea of Penal Substitution has dominated the playing field for almost 1,000 years.  However, it has recently been challenged by the very ideas that it had silenced so many years before.  Penal Substitution is a refinement of a slightly older idea known as Satisfaction.  For the thousand years before Penal Substitution was created, two ideas were formed about the death of Jesus.  One was Ransom, and the other was Moral Influence.  The more prevalent of the two was Moral Influence.

Why Matt Walsh's Spanking Arguments Ultimately Fail

REFUTING MATT WALSH ON SPANKING

INTRODUCTION

     I just finished reading Matt Walsh's new blog from yesterday (09/18/2014) entitled "Spanking is a disciplinary measure, not child abuse. Get a grip, people."  I am almost unable to retain my composure in responding to this, not because I am angry, but because his arguments are the most laughable serious arguments that I've ever read.  Matt completely butchered philosophical arguments and basic logic.  I say philosophical arguments because any arguments pertaining to morality automatically fall under the category of philosophy.  I will not only refute Matt's, but I will fix his arguments.  My position personally is that spanking is wrong, but any good philosopher/debater can argue from both sides effectively.  For the purposes of this blog, I will only be refuting the general points rather than traveling deep into the intricacies of the points because his points are so ridiculous and paper thin that they can be refuted at the basic level, let alone on a deeper, more complex level.