As I've been reading "From the Finger of God" by Philip S. Ross, he quotes from Hugh Martin on the atonement saying:
My question is: what are the theological consequences of denying the moral law? How does that impact one's view of God, creation, redemption etc.? What happens if one pulls on this thread?
Then in speaking about the doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement as being under attack Ross says:'What instrumentality or efficiency towards any thing like this can possibly be ascribed to the Incarnation of God's Son, if there be no strictly moral and authoritative juridicial law?' And he goes on to say that, 'So long as philosophy and theology shall conserve the distinctive peculiarity of Moral Law ... the Westminster doctrine, which is the Catholic doctrine, of Atonement is impregnable.
I don't understand what Ross is saying, about the bearing of the moral law on the atonement.Perhaps there is a coherent explanation for penal substation without moral law, but the issue Martin raised is not inconsequential to the integrated body of catholic doctrine.
My question is: what are the theological consequences of denying the moral law? How does that impact one's view of God, creation, redemption etc.? What happens if one pulls on this thread?