by Deep down, I think many sola scriptura believers feel the shakiness of their foundations. The defensiveness from so many evangelicals on points of doctrine is, I think, precisely because they know just how tenuous the edifice is. Witness the squalid attacks on British minister Steve Chalke for questioning penal substitutionary atonement. (We must have a thread bashing the shit out of that ghastly torture-worship, sometime. ) An inevitable consequence of making doctrine an individualistic responsibility. By contrast, attacking the teachings of the Magisterium seems to draw airy disdain bordering on indifference from Catholics. When the Vatican's got your back, one ranter isn't a concern.
Ask and ye shall receive!
The religious sacrificial nature of penal policy has fascinated me for a long time.
If we were truly an enlightened rational atheistic nation, we would ask questions about why precisely we do stuff.
The classic clearly religiously based behaviour is of course imprisonment.
I was amazed to discover on criminology that crimes and sins are not the same things.
OK, then why do criminal records last a life time?
What precisely are we doing when we lock someone up?
What is amusing about this is it is so old testament.
Wouldn't a xian penal system be forgiving people?
