A dialogue about atonement.

[seebs]

My wife wrote this.

God: You know the world? The one you keep using for toilet paper? I made that.
Man: ...oh.
God: Yeah. And those other humans, the ones you keep kicking when they're down? I made those.
Man: Oh. Um.
God: Uh-huh. And that self, the one you puff up and misrepresent and secretly hate? I made that too, and I really like it.
Man: I'm screwed. I suck. *sits down and cries*
God: No, I like you. I'm just saying. You keep wrecking my stuff.
Man: Um... I'm a pay for that.
God: You can't afford it.
Man: Can't you just take my sheep?
God: Fraid not.
Man: *cries harder*
God: But look, don't cry, little guy. I still like you.
Man: *wails*
God: Here's what I'm gonna do. I'm gonna write you a blank check, and then you can pay me back with it. Here, look, there's my signature and everything.
Man: *stops crying* Oo! Shiny!
God: There, take it. Write in whatever. Write in 'the whole world'.
Man: *uses blank check for toilet paper*
God: Um... yeah. Okay. Now look, I'm ripping it up. Never gonna cash this check. See? I really do still like you.
Man: Wow, God, you're the greatest! *skips away singing, to use the world for toilet paper some more*

This is a very, very, good parable. It amuses. It enlightens. It is true.

[Toney]

Seebs, Perhaps you and others can help me.

The Doctrine of Atonement as I understand it makes no sense to me.

Certainly, Jesus died for us -- for the community. Prophets who are not swept up into Heaven in fiery chariots get killed: the wages of martyrdom. Whether he died solely for our sins is problematic for me, especially since that particular word (sin) in our vernacular is somewhat over-baked. The early Church had a completely different take on sin -- it did not infer such high, eternal temperatures.

Let's say Jesus died for us and leave it at that and then seek to add-to rather than take-from His passion as a thought experiment from which we might learn something.

I really would like to have a dialogue on the atonement. God said He wanted obedience, not sacrifice. Maybe we could focus on the obedience side of that statement.

[Treasure the Questions]

I'm just wondering about the origins of this doctrine. Is it Protestant? Did it start with Augustine? I'm rather tired just now, so perhaps I'm forgetting something, but maybe it's a doctrine based on one or two verses with a lot of padding added to make it sound more convincing.

I'm trying to find if the Orthodox church believe in it from this website http://www.orthodox.clara.net/belief.htm#What%20We%20Believe

Looking at this atricle http://www.orthodox.clara.net/death_and_resurrection.htm I can't see it mentioned, except to explain the sacrificial aspect of Jesus' death. This is expalined rather differently from the way I've heard it explained before:
:preach: The language here is that of the altar. Sacrifice for the Jews was what put them right with God. On the Day of Atonement each year, animals would be sacrificed and the High Priest (only) would enter the Holy of Holies in the Temple to make atonement for the people. By a costly offering of life, God would be appeased. His righteousness would be satisfied by a change in the hearts of His People as they responded to the meaning of the nation’s offering in Jerusalem.

The connection here with the death of Jesus was patently obvious to the early Church. Sacrificial references to Jesus as the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world abound in the New Testament. It sets the tone right at the beginning of the ministry of Christ on the lips of the Prophet and Forerunner, St. John the Baptist: -

"Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world." [(John 1:29].

It is also reflected in the apostolic writings: -

" … he is the expiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world." [1 John 2:2]

There is something richer here than forgiveness, although it certainly includes forgiveness. The sacrificial death of Christ opens up our access to God universally. It is our reconciliation. The tearing in two of the Temple curtain is its most eloquent symbol. The New Temple is now the Church of Christ’s Body and Blood through which there is direct access for all who repent, believe and are baptised. The writer to the Hebrews takes up a large section of his letter showing how the sacrifice of Christ is both the fulfilment and replacement of Old Testament sacrifices that it far exceeds in power, depth and range. Furthermore it is Christ Himself as our great High Priest who offers himself on our behalf. In so far as He is therefore both Priest and Victim, we have a radically new understanding of sacrifice of God, offering himself to himself, for the love of mankind he wishes to forgive, cleanse and restore.

Can then sacrifice be both key and context for a biblical understanding if salvation? Not on its own, no. Sacrifice has no need of resurrection anymore that we would expect an animal sacrificed to live again to make its point and we have seen how the resurrection can in no wise be left out of the frame when searching for the key to an understanding what God in Christ has done as a whole.
I think I prefer this explanation, but I would be pleased to hear what others think.

Karin

[Toney]

Here is a link to a rather lengthy but informative essay on Violence in Christian Theology (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2096/is_2_51/ai_77674972) that amplifies the three atonement motifs summarized below.

1. The Ransom Theory. This held sway during the first thousand years of Christianity and postulates that atonement was the price paid by God in Christ to the Devil.

2. The Satisfaction (Redemption) Theory. Anselm of Canterbury (d. 1109) developed this theory. It is the one with which we all are probably most familiar. God's righteousness is offended by mankind's sins and Jesus' death restores order to the universe and expiates that sin. This leads to theories of universal redemption (the sins of the world) vs. limited redemption (the sins of the elect).

3. The Exemplarist Theory. Developed by Peter Abelard (d. 1142), this views Christ's death as an awe inspiring act of love that engenders love in us and we therefore cease sinning.

4. Sin. Torah refers to the Jewish way of life and sin refers to the disregard of its laws and codes of conduct. The entire Gentile world could be seen as 'sinners' since they were not governed by Jewish law. In other words, sin is disobedience to God inasmuch as Torah is God's word. There are 613 mitzvot (thou shalts and thou shalt nots) in the Torah. Christians are most familiar with the top ten.

5. Greek and Jewish Martyrology. The Noble Death is fundamental to Greek mythology: the warrior dies for his country. The significance of the noble death is enhanced in Jewish myth by the persecution and death of the sage or prophet who dies for his beliefs and in doing so effects positive change.

As Paul Harvey says, what about the "rest of the story?"

[Received]

I'll take Abelard for 600.

[Toney]

Good wager! Abelard is a sure shot and six hundred is the appropriate bet!