Dan's Marinations

If you've read the previous musings on atonement theory, you'll remember that the most common ways Christians have looked at this topic are known as:  the classical or ranson theory, moral influence, and substitutionary atonement.  Now I'd like to muddy the waters even more, before hopefully providing a clear path out of this where believers can live peacefully with each other without hurling theological handgrenades. In addition to the three views of atonement that looked at earlier, there have been any number of others.  In fact, one former member of the Conference Board of Ordained Ministry was well-known for reportedly asking ministerial candidates in interviews to list seven or eight different theories.  The great theologian Anselm of Canterbury was famous for promoting a theory known as "satisfaction."  In the early 20th century Gustav Aulen wrote of atonement in terms of victory of sin and death in Christus Victor .  The notion of atonement as vict...

For many of you who read these ramblings the idea of atonement I critique today will be familiar.  Love it or hate it, most Protestants have heard the language of substitutionary atonement more than any other.  If you are among the more conservative Protestants, this is probably the language that comes to mind first when you think of atonement. In very condensed form substitutionary atonement works like this.  Jesus is born of a virgin, and leads an absolutely sinless life.    Because he is sinless and perfect Jesus alone is able to atone for human sin by taking the guilt/penalty for the sins of the world.  In essence Jesus becomes a substitute for us.  Both the virgin birth and sinless life are essential for this model of atonement because the atoning sacrifice must be perfect in order to bear sin for everyone else.  Since he bore the penalty of sin, we don't bear it any more and we have peace with God.  Typically, subs...

One of the more unfortunate aspects of discussion of atonement in the current culture is that it has become polarized.  It is difficult now to separate this academic discussion from the emotional hand grenades that have been lobbed back and forth between liberals and conservatives for years.  I hope that you who read this can take a look at some of this different atonement language again.  None of them is sufficient all by itself, just as none of them is totally without merit or warrant.  In this week's entry and in next week's, I will critique the favorite atonement theories for liberals and then for conservatives.  I guess that if today's post doesn't step on your toes, that next week's will. As the ransom theory began to fade in popularity in the middle ages, Peter Abelarde made famous the idea that Jesus is primarily an example for us.  Focusing primarily on the love of God, he believed that God's love was so great that he could forgive with...

As will become clear, the difficulty in looking at the atonement is not that any one theory is really bad, but that all of them are insufficient.  No one theory can do justice what occurred because human language is insufficient to adequately describe it.  The first of the various ways believers have looked at the atonement is as a ransom.  This is sometimes called the classical theory of atonement.  The term "classical" theory stems from the fact that the early church fathers used ransom language far more than any other in describing Christ's death.  This remained the predominant view of atonement until the middle ages when it was subjected to withering criticism. In the pages of scripture there is no lack of warrant for looking at the atonement as a ransom that was paid on our behalf.  The term "ransom" is used seven times to refer to what God/Jesus does for us.  The related term "redeem" or "redeemer" is found over ninety times.  Both te...

With the memory's of last weekend's Holy Week services fresh in our minds, I'd like to take the next several marinations to reflect on atonement.  That Jesus' death atones for human sins is a fundamental part of our faith.  All of us fall short of the glory that was intended for us.  All of us stumble far too frequently.  None of us is worthy of the blessings God offers.  None of us, on our own merit can have any sort of meaningful relationship with God.  If that is the human problem, Jesus death is the solution.  It atones for our sins.  By it we are freed from the penalty of our sins, and to a certain extent are freed from the presence of sin.  The New Testament uses language such as "redemption," "propitiation," "ransom," and "sacrifice" in referring to Jesus' death.  All these loaded theological terms carry a lot of freight, and serve to convey the point that Jesus does make us right with God. If it is clear that Jesus d...

It is Good Friday as I write this.  This is perhaps the darkest, yet most triumphant day in our calendar as Christians.  It is dark, for on this day our Lord suffered public humiliation, torture, and execution for a whole lot of poor sinners like me.  It is triumphant because in a way only God can arrange, this death led to life.  The suffering was the way to victory.  As a minister of the Gospel Holy Week is the highlight of the year for me.  The procession of services from Maundy Thursday, Good Friday, and finally the worship on Easter morning are the services I look forward to most.  I relish this time of the year because it is absolutely the core of our faith.  Apart from the events of this weekend the church is little more than a social organization clothed in fancy, churchy language.  Now for the confession, I have a love/hate relationship with actually preaching during this season.  Yes, I would rather preach Maundy Thursday and...

I recently was listening to a lecture by John Bell from the Iona Abbey in Scotland.  A member of the Church of Scotland, he's a popular writer and speaker on the subject of music and worship.  In this lecture, Bell described one of the problems he sees in contemporary Christianity, the tendency to seek too much from worship.  He said that in years past there were three spheres of worship.  First, there was private prayer and study.  This was the foundation of the individual's spiritual life.  Secondly, many also had specific family devotions led by the head of the household.  Thirdly, everyone went to public worship.  The contemporary problem he pointed out was that for far too many Christians there is little private spiritual life.  Private prayer and study, private spiritual disciplines, personal devotion to the means of grace, are far too uncommon.  This is a dangerous phonomenon.  Our spiritual lives are our own responsibility...