|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Christus Victor
|
Talitha
Shipmate
# 5085
|
Posted
I've seen a lot of people referring to the Christus Victor account of the atonement, on threads like the UCCF/Spring Harvest bust-up thread, and also read this excellent article which someone (Jolly Jape, possibly) linked to on that thread.
As someone disillusioned with PSA, I find Christus Victor appeals to me a lot and I want to understand it better, so I thought I'd start a thread devoted to it.
What does CV mean to you?
How would you describe CV to someone else (say, a non-Christian, or a Christian who only knew PSA)?
Also, I gather that it's not as neatly formulaic as PSA and has to be appreciated more as a drama or story instead. But I'm wondering to what extent it can be understood rationally. It says wonderful, inspiring things about how Christ's death and resurrection made right all the things that were wrong in the world, rescued us from the devil and our sin, etc; but it gets a bit hand-wavey about how this was achieved. So I'm wondering whether that's an inherent part of CV and it's just a mystery to be accepted, or whether there are better explanations which I just haven't come across yet.
Thanks!
[ 29. October 2009, 07:43: Message edited by: Alan Cresswell ]
Posts: 554 | From: Cambridge, UK | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
If it's any help...
Humanity is constantly defeated by sin. We all know this, so did Paul in his "I do what I don't want to do" bit in Romans. When we go head to head against sin, it wins. As a rule. We win occasional battles, but we lose the war.
Enter a champion on our behalf - Jesus. Fully human, so able to fight in the battle between sin and humanity. But also fully God, so able to bring the power of God into the fight.
So Christ undergoes temptation. And wins. He then takes on the ugliest powers of sin - rejection, shame, injustice, suffering, torture, murder, alienation from God, and death. He counters these evils not by repaying evil with evil, but by facing them with love and forgiveness, forgiving the evildoers even as they nail Him up. He lets evil do its worst to Him, even to the point of letting it kill Him. But because He is greater than they are, He wins. Just as He won against temptation where we failed, He wins against sin where we fail. Hence Paul's imagery of Christ taking sin captive and leading it shamed through the streets in a victory parade, as Roman generals of his time would have done with their defeated prisoners.
Any help?
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pokrov
Shipmate
# 11515
|
Posted
Good stuff Karl.
It's also like Obi Wan Kenobi...
'If you strike me down, Darth, I'll become more powerful than you could possibly imagine....'.
God takes the weapons of the enemy and turns them on themselves. As our Orthodox brothers and sisters sing at Pascha:
'Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by death, and on those in tombs bestowing life'.
![[Axe murder]](graemlins/lovedrops.gif)
--------------------
Most Holy Theotokos pray for us!
Posts: 1469 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Talitha:
But I'm wondering to what extent it can be understood rationally. It says wonderful, inspiring things about how Christ's death and resurrection made right all the things that were wrong in the world, rescued us from the devil and our sin, etc; but it gets a bit hand-wavey about how this was achieved.
"Hand-wavey" - I love that. ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
I love Christus Victor. It is eminently rational and biblical, in my opinion. I'm sure someone can explain it clearly. ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
I like Karl's explanation.
One of the keys, I guess, is seeing how Christ's victories over hell were not just personal triumphs but were permanent and far reaching. They not only meant that He was stronger than they, but they permanently weakened the power of evil.
The other overarching concept, as Karl points out, is that Christ's apparent defeat is really victory, and what it is that dies and what lives in a spiritual triumph.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
Christus Victor, as with PSA - fine, but don't take it as the only valid description.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
The great advantage of Christus Victor is that salvation is something that Christ achieves rather than the result of being something that he passively endures. Karl Barth approvingly observes somewhere in the Dogmatics in Outline that all the Apostles Creed says of Christ's life is that he suffers and says that this sums it all up really. With respect to the Greatest Theologian Of The Twentieth Century I think the Incarnation amounts to really rather more than that.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Talitha
Shipmate
# 5085
|
Posted
Karl: thanks, that is helpful. Although I still don't get how, in CV, Christ's being victorious over sin and death achieves anything for us, as opposed to just for him. Is it just because he was human and so he was "united to us" in some sense, and/or represented us? How does his victory actually fix the problem of sin in our lives?
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
One of the keys, I guess, is seeing how Christ's victories over hell were not just personal triumphs but were permanent and far reaching. They not only meant that He was stronger than they, but they permanently weakened the power of evil.
OK, but how come?
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
Christus Victor, as with PSA - fine, but don't take it as the only valid description.
I know. AIUI, how the atonement really works is beyond our understanding, so we have a selection of metaphors/analogies which help. Like a lot of people, I personally don't find PSA helpful, and I find that the little I know of CV so far is more useful for me in drawing me closer to God etc so I want to find out more about it.
[edit: code]
[ 17. May 2007, 11:50: Message edited by: Talitha ]
Posts: 554 | From: Cambridge, UK | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pokrov
Shipmate
# 11515
|
Posted
Talitha,
I raised this point on another thread.
The 'victory' of Christ effects us because we are physically united with him. We become part of his physical body, so when we suffer - he suffers (remember the road to Damascus 'where are you persecuting me?'), and when he suffers - we suffer ('if they persecuted me, they will persecute you').
When he dies - we die. When he is raised - we are raised.
I can't really overemphasise this enough since it is no 'theory' of the atonement but actual FACT!
Of course we struggle (in our current 'one body'/'one mind' self-understanding) to engage with this fact, so we need to act it out.
PSA removes the discomfort of having to 'see' what is (to us now) 'unseeable' since it postulates atonement in terms of a legal construct. As with ALL laws/legal constructs, these are abstract concepts which help point to a greater reality (well, reality itself!), and it's the 'abstractness' which sooths our confused minds.
I guess it's the difference between reading an illustrated book about embryology, and actually being present for the birth of ones child.
When the 'daylight' comes, one has no need for the 'candles'.
--------------------
Most Holy Theotokos pray for us!
Posts: 1469 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Talitha:
Karl: thanks, that is helpful. Although I still don't get how, in CV, Christ's being victorious over sin and death achieves anything for us, as opposed to just for him. Is it just because he was human and so he was "united to us" in some sense and/or represented us?
Take out the word "just" and yes. This is why we are baptised into Christ; this is why we are His body; this is why we die to sin and are alive in Christ; this is why we must decrease and He must increase, to use various NT formulae.
quote:
How does his victory actually fix the problem of sin in our lives?
Just as He identified with us, so we identify with Him. Through the indwelling Holy Spirit we share His victory over sin.
quote:
OK, but how come?
Because humanity now has its reconciliation to God and His power through the one who is man and God. Evil gets its power over us through our weakness in the face of it, but in Christ we have one who can overcome it in us.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Talitha:
I've seen a lot of people referring to the Christus Victor account of the atonement, on threads like the UCCF/Spring Harvest bust-up thread, and also read this excellent article which someone (Jolly Jape, possibly) linked to on that thread.
Well, it wasn't me, but if I had discovered it I would certainly have linked to it. It sums up, pretty well, all that I believe about the Atonement. And the icing on the cake was the quote from Moltmann at the end: quote:
"God is not greater than he is in this humiliation. God is not more glorious than he is in this self-surrender. God is not more powerful than he is in this helplessness. God is not more divine than he is in this humanity".
How it works, it seems to me, is exemplified in that quotation. The full power of God is not in the legions of angels and the thuderbolts, but in the hummility and helplessness of the Jesus who "conquers by His own defeat and wins by losing all", as Michael Card put it. He won the victory because He really was more powerful than sin and death, but that power is not anything that a fallen world recognises as power.
We participate in it, because we are identified with Him in His death, and raised to life with Him in His resurrection. This is not merely an intellectual assent to Christ, but an objective change in our nature. But that isn't really any different to what happens under the other models of the Atonement.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Talitha:
How does his victory actually fix the problem of sin in our lives?
I don't disagree with what Karl said. We share His victory through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
I would add into it a cosmic view of the connection between the spiritual and physical worlds.
This concept is predicated on the idea that heaven and hell are influences that really do affect the lives of every person on earth. When humanity is wicked, hell becomes an increasingly powerful influence on human minds. When people sincerely follow God, hell's power is diminished.
The need for the Incarnation was that hell had become so powerful that humans with their limited power, or with the limited means at their disposal, could no longer resist its influence. Utter damnation threatened.
What God did to remedy this was to take on a human nature through birth into the world, take on the sins of the world, use His power to overcome them, and in this way reduce the power of hell.
quote:
Originally posted by Talitha:
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
One of the keys, I guess, is seeing how Christ's victories over hell were not just personal triumphs but were permanent and far reaching. They not only meant that He was stronger than they were, but they permanently weakened the power of evil.
OK, but how come?
The important thing to remember, as I understand it, is that Christ was not overcoming hell in absolute terms. There is actually no contest there whatsoever. Hell cannot even begin to challenge God. The contest was for the minds and hearts of humanity.
The challenge involved in the Incarnation was to give people the means to resist the power of evil while leaving their freedom intact. At any point God could have simply blown hell out of the water, miraculously saving all people. This, however, would have completely undermined the whole point of creation. The whole point of creation, as I understand it, is to have an object for God to love that can return that love freely and receive eternal happiness because of it. This is simply what love is about, and God is love.
So God's strategy was two-fold. One part was to create a body of knowledge that was accessible and helpful to people for the purpose of allowing them to willingly reform their lives according to His will. This is the Gospel.
The other part was to free the human mind of the oppressive spiritual influences of the hells.
He did this by entering into spiritual combats with them by taking on a human nature - which they could attack just as they attacked all people. As He resisted and fought against their influences the effects successively subdued the entire population of hell.
So the events of Jesus' life, as described in the Gospels, are just the external appearance of enormously significant spiritual contests that Jesus was continually engaged in throughout His life.
When Jesus was victorious in a contest, through doing His Father's will, through the words that He spoke, through refuting the arguments of His opponents, through healing, through feeding and other miracles, the effects were much greater than the stories would indicate. These incidents represented entire societies of hell being put in their place, and their power reduced.
The effect on humanity as a whole was not that no one would be inclined to evil, but just that the balance between heaven and hell was restored. People could then freely choose between the two.
In addition, the effect of the information that Jesus taught, and which is preserved in the Gospels, is that people can know Him and choose to follow Him with much more powerful means at their disposal. Knowledge is power. This is why Jesus is the Word of God and why He speaks so consistently about His mission being to teach the truth and use it to overcome evil, setting us free.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wilfried
Shipmate
# 12277
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Talitha:
Although I still don't get how, in CV, Christ's being victorious over sin and death achieves anything for us, as opposed to just for him. Is it just because he was human and so he was "united to us" in some sense, and/or represented us? How does his victory actually fix the problem of sin in our lives?
A reading appointed for today, Ascension Day, seems to address this:
quote:
...For just as he remained with us ever after his ascension, so we too are already in heaven with him, even though what is promised us has not yet been fulfilled in our bodies. Christ is now exalted above the heavens, but he still suffers on earth all the pain that we, the members of his body, have to bear. He showed this when he cried, Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? and when he said: I was hungry and you gave me food...
While in heaven he is also with us; and we while on earth are with him. He is here with us by his divinity, his power and his love. We cannot be in heaven, as he is on earth, by divinity, but in him, we can be there by love...
These words are explained by our oneness with Christ, for he is our head and we are his body. No one ascended into heaven except Christ because we also are Christ: he is the Son of Man by his union with us, and we by our union with him are sons of God... [A]lthough he ascended alone, we also ascend, because we are in him by grace...
-St. Augustine of Hippo, Sermo de Ascensione Domini
I found this quite profound last night saying the Offices, and thought it was apropos.
Posts: 429 | From: Lefty on the Right Coast | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
W, that's a wonderful quote! Thanks for sharing it.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pastorgirl
Shipmate
# 12294
|
Posted
IMHO, all four of the major theories of the atonement (satisfaction, substitution, ransom, and Christus Victor have biblical support. They are images, metaphors, to explain a transcendent reality. Most transcendent things need to be explained with metaphors because they are non-empirical. As with all metaphors, they reveal one aspect or "slice" of the reality, but if pressed too far, they break down and don't fit. Thus, I think it's a mistake to choose one theory over the others, or to fault one for the places where it doesn't work (e.g. the "bloodthirsty" aspect of substitution). Rather, you look at each to see what it has to say to us that is true.
Posts: 757 | From: L.A. | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pastorgirl:
IMHO, all four of the major theories of the atonement (satisfaction, substitution, ransom, and Christus Victor have biblical support. They are images, metaphors, to explain a transcendent reality. Most transcendent things need to be explained with metaphors because they are non-empirical. As with all metaphors, they reveal one aspect or "slice" of the reality, but if pressed too far, they break down and don't fit. Thus, I think it's a mistake to choose one theory over the others, or to fault one for the places where it doesn't work (e.g. the "bloodthirsty" aspect of substitution). Rather, you look at each to see what it has to say to us that is true.
But it is also important to raise up the ways that each is false, for exactly the reasons you cite.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pokrov
Shipmate
# 11515
|
Posted
Tom,
This is a valid angle.
On various threads we've all been banging our heads against various walls trying to explain the advantages of our various positions. What if we were to honestly try and explain the difficulties of our positions.
So, what are the potential problems with CV and (pertinent to several debates I've been having with Johnny) what are the potential problems with PSA?
One of my concerns is that on a good number of blogsites, you can hear rehearsed again and again that 'PSA is the glorious heart of the gospel'. Any dissent from this position immediately brings down the curse of 'blasphemy'. However, if PSA is only an analogy then where are it's weaknesses and do it's devotees see these?
--------------------
Most Holy Theotokos pray for us!
Posts: 1469 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pastorgirl
Shipmate
# 12294
|
Posted
quote:
But it is also important to raise up the ways that each is false, for exactly the reasons you cite.
Good point. Yes, I agree.
Posts: 757 | From: L.A. | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pastorgirl
Shipmate
# 12294
|
Posted
The obvious deficiency of PSA is it's tendency to picture a "bloodthirsty" God who needs to be somehow "appeased". The worst critics will describe it's depiction of the Father as a rageaholic abusive dad who has a bad day at work and comes home to beat the kids.
But the advantage is the element of sacrifice. PSA emphasizes that the atonement cost something. It wasn't just a one-off, "oh, never mind." The "costliness" ensures that we will never take the atonement lightly, as some small thing. It emphasizes the "darkness" of our situation, the great need that we have for God's saving grace. At the same time it emphasizes the enormous love God has for us, that he would not withhold even this great price.
Again, I think we have to embrace this as a metaphor not a literal transaction, and therefore embrace the "truthful slice" (God's great and costly love for us) while rejecting the false (God as bloodthirsty rageaholic).
Posts: 757 | From: L.A. | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pastorgirl:
Again, I think we have to embrace this as a metaphor not a literal transaction, and therefore embrace the "truthful slice" (God's great and costly love for us) while rejecting the false (God as bloodthirsty rageaholic).
I'm thinking about the idea that each model has "truthful slices" as well as false aspects of a greater picture that is out of our reach.
Hmmm.
I tend to be skeptical about the value of the PSA model and to think that Christus Victor explains everything.
Not that I object to or disagree with "God's great and costly love for us" but I worry about the way that this comes across in PSA. It seems to say that a price is literally somehow paid by death, that justice somehow demands this, and that this is what salvation is about - rather than any kind of actual reformation or improvement on the part of the individual.
But probably Christus Victor has drawbacks as well. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pokrov
Shipmate
# 11515
|
Posted
Certainly the 'first look' type of justice that this model embodies is retributive justice.
I'm not saying that if you twist it this way and that one can't rehabilitate this notion a bit, but - as far as models go - the 'gut reaction' is 'God is angry with human Sin and wants/needs to punish it'.
CV/Resurrection motifs provide a more 'restorative' model and, since our current earthly lives are tied up with becoming 'restored', this is why I would rather focus my energies and thoughts on these models.
I simply fail to see how PSA makes an existential difference in my life NOW.
--------------------
Most Holy Theotokos pray for us!
Posts: 1469 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
A Feminine Force
Ship's Onager
# 7812
|
Posted
For me, the whole point of PSA falls apart at the resurrection. PSA seems to assume that Jesus died, is dead, is removed from reality as we experience it. Because when I look at the crucifixion, it's only one event in a continuum of events that characterize the Presence of Christ in the world. PSA seems to me to start and end with the Passion.
Coincidentally, most people I know who believe in PSA also seem to be hanging around waiting for the Apolcalypse to bring back into material reality the Christ they seem to think departed from it in the first place.
CV, to me, is the victory of the Christ Logos over the fabric of material reality. The Logos is an inescapable quintessence that now underpins and supercedes all laws of physical reality, including those laws we think are so scientifically sacred like Newtonian, quantum mechanical, and structural laws of reality.
He's here, He's more Real than Reality, more live and immediate than we can possibly comprehend, and there's nothing but nothing that will not be turned to His Law and purpose in the end.
LAFF
[ 17. May 2007, 20:13: Message edited by: A Feminine Force ]
Posts: 2115 | From: Kingdom of Heaven | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubifex Maximus
Shipmate
# 4874
|
Posted
quote:
From Talitha
Karl: thanks, that is helpful. Although I still don't get how, in CV, Christ's being victorious over sin and death achieves anything for us, as opposed to just for him. Is it just because he was human and so he was "united to us" in some sense, and/or represented us? How does his victory actually fix the problem of sin in our lives?
Because it acurately models the psychological healing process which means that we can use it to find healing for ourselves. We all of us have a "voice" inside which can be critical and harsh. It is easy to identify this as our "conscience", even worse, to identify it with God criticising us and punishing us for falling short. The people who criticised Jesus represented legitimate authority; the church and the state, as it were. These people were, in the thinking of the time, doing God's work, but they punished God for falling below their standards. If we ignore the critical voice inside our heads but accept ourselves as we are with all our fears and our shortcomings, and don't deny them or argue against them, they begin to loose their power. We become less afraid, we gain the power to act independantly of our most powerful emotions; we gain a space to reflect, not simply to react. We gain the opportunity to act in love. We can learn to care for ourselves, address our shortcomings with creative solutions that do not depend on our fears and limitations. We can learn to treat ourselves without anger and violence.
We can also do this with the real people we share the world with. If we are no longer impressed with the critical voices of our own "conscience" because we know that it isn't our conscience or the voice of God, we can see that those who are critical and violent towards us need not hold our attention either. In a very real sense, the power of Sin is broken here. We now have the chance to accept those around us in their brokenness, to listen to them instead of flying off the handle, and to begin a conversation, to build relationships.
The power that is broken on the cross is the power of violence. It is unmasked; it can no longer be seen as the power of God, on the contrary the power of God is revealed as power of Love, as God accepts the worst we can dish out to Him, but does not punish us in return.
[ETA correct attribution of the quote]
[ 17. May 2007, 20:36: Message edited by: Tubifex Maximus ]
--------------------
Sit down, Oh sit down, sit down next to me.
Posts: 400 | From: Manchester | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wolfgang
Shipmate
# 10809
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by A Feminine Force:
For me, the whole point of PSA falls apart at the resurrection. PSA seems to assume that Jesus died, is dead, is removed from reality as we experience it. Because when I look at the crucifixion, it's only one event in a continuum of events that characterize the Presence of Christ in the world. PSA seems to me to start and end with the Passion.
Coincidentally, most people I know who believe in PSA also seem to be hanging around waiting for the Apolcalypse to bring back into material reality the Christ they seem to think departed from it in the first place.
CV, to me, is the victory of the Christ Logos over the fabric of material reality. The Logos is an inescapable quintessence that now underpins and supercedes all laws of physical reality, including those laws we think are so scientifically sacred like Newtonian, quantum mechanical, and structural laws of reality.
He's here, He's more Real than Reality, more live and immediate than we can possibly comprehend, and there's nothing but nothing that will not be turned to His Law and purpose in the end.
LAFF
Well I'm quite sympathetic to PSA and whilst you are of course right to emphasise the fact that the resurrection follows the crucifixion, the first Christian writers see the cross as the turning point of all history; not one event among many, but the decisive crux. Rather than starting with the passion narratives of M, M, L and J a correct understanding of PSA begins with Genesis 1-3, through Exodus and the rest of the OT. That on the cross Jesus did what Israel and the world could never do for themselves, becoming a curse that the righteous requirements of the law might be met in us. Jesus' reconciling work is achieved at the cross Col 1:20: this is, as Colossians emphasises, a victory, but it is a victory achieved as the power of sin is spent on Jesus, indeed as God the father condemns that sin in God the Son, the willing sacrificial lamb (Ro 8:3). The resurrection, then, evidences this victory, as Jesus emerges from the tomb as the first-fruits of the new creation.
You're right in saying that Jesus is the new reality, but it is also true to say we do not experience this reality as we one day will. God is present in his creation through his Spirit, but that's not to say that one day Christ won't come down (or appear) from heaven to liberate creation from it's bondage to decay. Only then will we see him as he is (1Jn 3:2), when he appears and fills the world with his presence (I think "parousia" means presence, doesn't it?), when he transforms our bodies to be more like his glorious body, and when he rids the world of sin and evil. But this all hinges on the cross. New creation is, to use a cliche, free but not cheap, it came at price which only Jesus' blood was good enough to pay.
--------------------
"The socialist who is a Christian is more to be dreaded than a socialist who is an atheist" - Dostoevksy
Posts: 121 | From: The North | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Esmeralda
Ship's token UK Mennonite
# 582
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tubifex Maximus:
The power that is broken on the cross is the power of violence.
I have problems with a lot of your post, Tubifex, because it does not deal with the real pangs of conscience for real sin - I know we can have false guilt but we can also very much have real guilt.
However the statement above, I think, gets to the very heart of recent readings of Christus Victor. Mennonites such as Denny Weaver and other 'radical' scholars such as Walter Wink, tend to favour a modified form of CV, in which the non-violence of the cross overcomes the violence of the 'powers' or the 'domination system'. This means the resurrection, rather than being a sort of divine 'I told you I was the Son of God!', becomes the demonstration that love is stronger than hate and non-violence is stronger than violence.
I find this personally more satisfying than PSA because it says to me that God 'absorbs' the power of human and cosmic evil, and in so doing neutralizes it. I think PSA can only make emotional sense to you if you have been brought up with strict ideas of wrongdoing and punishment - for people who feel every sin must be punished, it can be very liberating. But for those like me who were brought up with ready forgiveness and not many rules, it just doesn't scratch where we're itching.
--------------------
I can take the despair. It's the hope I can't stand.
http://reversedstandard.wordpress.com/
Posts: 17415 | From: A small island nobody pays any attention to | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
A Feminine Force
Ship's Onager
# 7812
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Wolfgang:
Well I'm quite sympathetic to PSA and whilst you are of course right to emphasise the fact that the resurrection follows the crucifixion, the first Christian writers see the cross as the turning point of all history; not one event among many, but the decisive crux.
Agreed, this is a critical juncture: the moment at which the Christ Logos passed out of the body of Jesus and into the sphere of reality. The Temple veil was torn, signifying no more separation between God and the Creation. Solar eclipse, earthquake, the whole thing. Material reality was turned on its ear by the permeation of the Logos at every material and etheric level. A cataclysmic transformation worked on Creation. Thank God.
quote:
Originally posted by Wolfgang:
The resurrection, then, evidences this victory, as Jesus emerges from the tomb as the first-fruits of the new creation.
The first fruits of those that sleep. Interesting turn of phrase. In other words, yo, everybody! Wake up! This is the New Reality! The laws of physics are turned on their heads. All He has done, we will do, and more, just like He promised.
quote:
Originally posted by Wolfgang:
You're right in saying that Jesus is the new reality, but it is also true to say we do not experience this reality as we one day will.
I don't know what you are waiting for, or what anyone else is waiting for, for that matter. As far as I am concerned, it's here, now, live immediate and more Real than real. It's a "Way of Being" that is accessible to me here and now.
quote:
Originally posted by Wolfgang:
God is present in his creation through his Spirit, but that's not to say that one day Christ won't come down (or appear) from heaven to liberate creation from it's bondage to decay.
The wages of sin is death. Give it up, and the problem of decay goes with it. It seems pretty simple to me: the only bondage I am under is that of my own devising, my sin. My salvation and healing are already accomplished, I just have to hand my sin to Christ for its proper disposal. Why would I carry my crap into the Kingdom? How can I celebrate the Kingdom if I insist on carting my crap everywhere with me as if it would kill me to give it up? It's killing me to carry it!
quote:
Originally posted by Wolfgang:
Only then will we see him as he is (1Jn 3:2), when he appears and fills the world with his presence (I think "parousia" means presence, doesn't it?), when he transforms our bodies to be more like his glorious body, and when he rids the world of sin and evil.
He has already filled the world with His presence. What's preventing you or anyone from seeing Him right now "as He is", (whatever that means)?
quote:
Originally posted by Wolfgang:
But this all hinges on the cross. New creation is, to use a cliche, free but not cheap, it came at price which only Jesus' blood was good enough to pay.
Agreed, see paragraph 1.
LAFF
--------------------
C2C - The Cure for What Ails Ya?
Posts: 2115 | From: Kingdom of Heaven | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubifex Maximus
Shipmate
# 4874
|
Posted
quote:
From EsmeraldaI have problems with a lot of your post, Tubifex, because it does not deal with the real pangs of conscience for real sin - I know we can have false guilt but we can also very much have real guilt.
I could have expressed myself better. We have the power to destinguish between self abuse and real falling short (the meaning of the Greek word Hamartia that we translate as Sin). If one feels pangs of conscience for real sin, then act; act creatively to make amends, we now have the power. Learn where one fell short and do better in the future. Genuinely wicked people do not experience crises of conscience.
Jesus, on the other hand, was not justly punished; He was without sin.
My own experience, and I see it in the people who I know also, is of being overly cowed by anxiety and self rejecting. We try to bash ourselves into being good instead of loving ourselves. Your mileage may vary, of course.
--------------------
Sit down, Oh sit down, sit down next to me.
Posts: 400 | From: Manchester | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pastorgirl
Shipmate
# 12294
|
Posted
quote:
I'm thinking about the idea that each model has "truthful slices" as well as false aspects of a greater picture that is out of our reach./B]
Part of my self-acknowledged bias is that, as an evangelical, I see all of Scripture as authoritative. Substitution (not necessarily PSA, but substitution) is in the Bible, so I have to do something w/ it. But then, satisfaction, ransom, and Christus victor are also in the Bible. The best way to make sense of it for me is to understand all four as metaphor, just as we have various images for God-- shepherd, rock, mother hen, Father. They give us different perspectives on our relationship to God, but all will fall short if pressed too far.
quote:
[B]I tend to be skeptical about the value of the PSA model and to think that Christus Victor explains everything...
But probably Christus Victor has drawbacks as well[
I think different metaphors speak better to different people in different places. Even in the NT, you will find allusions to substitution primarily in the books written for Greeks, where it seems to fit with their philosophical worldview. You find allusions to satisfaction in books written for Jews, since it resonates with their understanding of the Temple sacrifice. Ransom theory probably most appealing to the poor and to slaves.
Christus victor seems to be very popular today, and justifiably so. (It was also very popular in the patristic period). If it speaks to you powerfully, I wouldn't mess with that. Just realize that the other models are biblical as well, at least when understood as metaphors, rather than legalistic, literal (and exclusive) transactions.
quote:
Not that I object to or disagree with "God's great and costly love for us" but I worry about the way that this comes across in PSA. It seems to say that a price is literally somehow paid by death, that justice somehow demands this, and that this is what salvation is about - rather than any kind of actual reformation or improvement on the part of the individual.
I think perhaps the problem is not so much with substitution as it is alluded to in the NT per se, but rather the way PSA in particular is articulated and argued among fundamentalist Christians today.
As an aside, I would add that another problem in the whole discussion is thinking of salvation ONLY as "getting into heaven when I die", when the NT seems to see it as much more than that. It is "abundant life"-- not just eternal life, but abundant. The abundant life doesn't begin after death, but today. It is a life of freedom from the slavery to sin, slavery to what Walter Wink describes as "the powers that be"-- the cycle of violence and oppression. Freedom from a "fruitless way of life" (McLaren).
Posts: 757 | From: L.A. | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pastorgirl
Shipmate
# 12294
|
Posted
quote:
I could have expressed myself better. We have the power to destinguish between self abuse and real falling short (the meaning of the Greek word Hamartia that we translate as Sin). If one feels pangs of conscience for real sin, then act; act creatively to make amends, we now have the power. Learn where one fell short and do better in the future. Genuinely wicked people do not experience crises of conscience.
In psychological terms, you're talking about the difference between shame and guilt or remorse. Or what Paul calls in 2 Cor. "godly guilt" vs. "worldly guilt".
Posts: 757 | From: L.A. | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Wolfgang:
quote:
Originally posted by A Feminine Force:
For me, the whole point of PSA falls apart at the resurrection. PSA seems to assume that Jesus died, is dead, is removed from reality as we experience it. Because when I look at the crucifixion, it's only one event in a continuum of events that characterize the Presence of Christ in the world. PSA seems to me to start and end with the Passion.
Well I'm quite sympathetic to PSA and whilst you are of course right to emphasise the fact that the resurrection follows the crucifixion, the first Christian writers see the cross as the turning point of all history; not one event among many, but the decisive crux.
And yet, the guy who wrote this would seem to find some midcom of significance for the faith in that anti-climactic act of resurrection...
--Tom Clune
[ 17. May 2007, 22:18: Message edited by: tclune ]
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
Well I'm quite sympathetic to PSA and whilst you are of course right to emphasise the fact that the resurrection follows the crucifixion, the first Christian writers see the cross as the turning point of all history; not one event among many, but the decisive crux. Rather than starting with the passion narratives of M, M, L and J a correct understanding of PSA begins with Genesis 1-3, through Exodus and the rest of the OT. That on the cross Jesus did what Israel and the world could never do for themselves, becoming a curse that the righteous requirements of the law might be met in us. Jesus' reconciling work is achieved at the cross Col 1:20: this is, as Colossians emphasises, a victory, but it is a victory achieved as the power of sin is spent on Jesus, indeed as God the father condemns that sin in God the Son, the willing sacrificial lamb (Ro 8:3). The resurrection, then, evidences this victory, as Jesus emerges from the tomb as the first-fruits of the new creation.
I think that the problems with this analysis are twofold.
Firstly, it reduces the problem of sin to merely human beings failing to be able to obey the law. At the very least this is a somewhat privatised view of what is happening in the Atonement. The thrust of the Old Testament longing for Messiah is not a seeking for personal "salvation", but for the redemption of the whole creation - for a re-ordering of the world where God's restorative justice is seen to triumph. Of course, that is one of the reasons why I believe that CV is the model most consonant with the mission of Messiah.
Secondly, it undervalues the resurrection, making it merely an add-on to the Cross, just the proof that the death of Jesus was efficatious. This seems to be a long way from how the New Testament authors viewed things. Rather, it seems that Paul was so insistant on preaching the resurrection that the Athenians considered that he was preaching two Gods, Jesus and Anastasius. I agree with you that Jesus victory over the forces of evil was acheived on the cross, but it was a victory for a purpose. That purpose was the remaking of the whole of creation (in fulfilment of the Messianic dream) and that remaking was acheived by the resurrection. Yes, we die with Him on the cross, but we are able to be raised to life with him as he bursts out of the tomb. It isn't just the evidence for the victory, it is the victory. It's what it was all for, and without it the cross would have no meaning.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
A Feminine Force
Ship's Onager
# 7812
|
Posted
I agree with Jolly Jape, here. The resurrection is the perfection and completion of God's plan for the healing of the world. It's the alpha and omega: the omega of the old creation and the alpha of the new. It's the event that "closes the loop" of the lemniscate of infinity.
Befor Christ, reality was on a linear/dualistic track that showed good/evil as opposite sides of a continuum. Like two sides of a long magnetic tape. The resurrection brought an end to the beginning, a beginning to the end, and an end to all beginnings and endings. It opened the door back to the infinite and joined all in unity with the Creator.
So, sometimes I will play a role on the "A" side of the tape, but that role will inevitably and seamlessly lead me into a role on the "B" side. Awareness of Him as my boon companion, acceptance of my roles, surrender, grace, forgiveness and "travelling lightly" will forever lead me in the paths of light and darkness in joy without pain, remorse or travail.
LAFF
--------------------
C2C - The Cure for What Ails Ya?
Posts: 2115 | From: Kingdom of Heaven | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
[QB] [QUOTE] Well I'm quite sympathetic to PSA and whilst you are of course right to emphasise the fact that the resurrection follows the crucifixion, the first Christian writers see the cross as the turning point of all history; not one event among many, but the decisive crux. Rather than starting with the passion narratives of M, M, L and J a correct understanding of PSA begins with Genesis 1-3, through Exodus and the rest of the OT. That on the cross Jesus did what Israel and the world could never do for themselves, becoming a curse that the righteous requirements of the law might be met in us. Jesus' reconciling work is achieved at the cross Col 1:20: this is, as Colossians emphasises, a victory, but it is a victory achieved as the power of sin is spent on Jesus, indeed as God the father condemns that sin in God the Son, the willing sacrificial lamb (Ro 8:3). The resurrection, then, evidences this victory, as Jesus emerges from the tomb as the first-fruits of the new creation.
I think that the problems with this analysis are twofold.
Firstly, it reduces the problem of sin to merely human beings failing to be able to obey the law. At the very least this is a somewhat privatised view of what is happening in the Atonement.
Addressing just this one point, I think that models other than PSA sidestep the depravity of the human condition caused by sin. The rot in our nature is so fundamental that God himself had to shed his own blood to reverse it. The law as the guideline of God's righteousness served mainly as a demonstration to the man who tried to keep all 613 of the commandments, that the standard of righteousness was an impossible one of him in his natural state.
To me this is clearly Paul's view,(Ro 4-6) Peter's view (1Pet 1:18,19) and the view of the writer to the Hebrews (see Ch 9:12-14). Christ is certainly the victor in the sense of his conquest of Satan's scheme to keep mankind in the thrall of sinfulness. The resurrection is God the Father's vindication of the Son's propitiatary act or sacrifice. To any who find the God of PSA a bloody and vengeful being, one could perhaps point out that in the atonement he became the victim of his own vengefulness for the express purpose of sparing his creation whom he has redeemed thereby.
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
[QB] [QUOTE] Well I'm quite sympathetic to PSA and whilst you are of course right to emphasise the fact that the resurrection follows the crucifixion, the first Christian writers see the cross as the turning point of all history; not one event among many, but the decisive crux. Rather than starting with the passion narratives of M, M, L and J a correct understanding of PSA begins with Genesis 1-3, through Exodus and the rest of the OT. That on the cross Jesus did what Israel and the world could never do for themselves, becoming a curse that the righteous requirements of the law might be met in us. Jesus' reconciling work is achieved at the cross Col 1:20: this is, as Colossians emphasises, a victory, but it is a victory achieved as the power of sin is spent on Jesus, indeed as God the father condemns that sin in God the Son, the willing sacrificial lamb (Ro 8:3). The resurrection, then, evidences this victory, as Jesus emerges from the tomb as the first-fruits of the new creation.
quote:
I think that the problems with this analysis are twofold.
Firstly, it reduces the problem of sin to merely human beings failing to be able to obey the law. At the very least this is a somewhat privatised view of what is happening in the Atonement.
Addressing just this one point, I think that models other than PSA sidestep the depravity of the human condition caused by sin. The rot in our nature is so fundamental that God himself had to shed his own blood to reverse it. The law as the guideline of God's righteousness served mainly as a demonstration to the man who tried to keep all 613 of the commandments, that the standard of righteousness was an impossible one of him in his natural state.
To me this is clearly Paul's view,(Ro 4-6) Peter's view (1Pet 1:18,19) and the view of the writer to the Hebrews (see Ch 9:12-14). Christ is certainly the victor in the sense of his conquest of Satan's scheme to keep mankind in the thrall of sinfulness. The resurrection is God the Father's vindication of the Son's propitiatary act or sacrifice. To any who find the God of PSA a bloody and vengeful being, one could perhaps point out that in the atonement he became the victim of his own vengefulness for the express purpose of sparing his creation whom he has redeemed thereby.
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Scrumpmeister
Ship’s Taverner
# 5638
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Collins:
Good stuff Karl.
It's also like Obi Wan Kenobi...
I went to school with a chap whose parents were from Africa (I forget which country), and whose surname was Wankenobi. Bear in mind that he was conceived and born in the early 1980s, you can perhaps not forgive that, but at least understandy why, his parents named him Obi.
He and I also went to the same college, and our head of year came into our English class one day looking for Obi. He wasn't there, and she asked what his surname was. When we told her, she laughed, thinking we were joking, (much to my confusion) until she realised that we were being serious. It must have been about a year later that I came across a reference to the name Obi-Wan Kenobi in relation to Star Wars and realised why she thought it was funny. I didn't grow up in a house of sci-fi fans and don't much care for it, which is why I didn't know.
--------------------
If Christ is not fully human, humankind is not fully saved. - St John of Saint-Denis
Posts: 14741 | From: Greater Manchester, UK | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pokrov
Shipmate
# 11515
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Saint Bertelin:
I went to school with a chap whose parents were from Africa (I forget which country), and whose surname was Wankenobi. Bear in mind that he was conceived and born in the early 1980s, you can perhaps not forgive that, but at least understandy why, his parents named him Obi.
I think that beats Nicholas If-Jesus-Had-Not-Died-For-Thee-Thou-Hadst-Been-Damned Barbon
--------------------
Most Holy Theotokos pray for us!
Posts: 1469 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
Addressing just this one point, I think that models other than PSA sidestep the depravity of the human condition caused by sin. The rot in our nature is so fundamental that God himself had to shed his own blood to reverse it. The law as the guideline of God's righteousness served mainly as a demonstration to the man who tried to keep all 613 of the commandments, that the standard of righteousness was an impossible one of him in his natural state.
To me this is clearly Paul's view,(Ro 4-6) Peter's view (1Pet 1:18,19) and the view of the writer to the Hebrews (see Ch 9:12-14). Christ is certainly the victor in the sense of his conquest of Satan's scheme to keep mankind in the thrall of sinfulness. The resurrection is God the Father's vindication of the Son's propitiatary act or sacrifice.
Part of the problem here, ISTM, is that there is a tendency7 to critique models of Atonement other than PSA through the lens of PSA. Thus rejection of PSA is often seen by its proponents as necessarily a rejection of a lot of other concepts not actually inherent in PSA, but more generally evangelical. Thus, I have no problem with agreeing with you, Jamat, that Jesus' death was a precondition for our reconciliation to God. What I don't see is why, if this is a given, that CV in any way sidesteps the problem of sin. It's not our view of the toxicity of sin that divides us, but our view of the nature of the remedy, our view, if you like, of how the Atonement "works".
quote:
To any who find the God of PSA a bloody and vengeful being, one could perhaps point out that in the atonement he became the victim of his own vengefulness for the express purpose of sparing his creation whom he has redeemed thereby.
Really, this is beside the point. The debate is not whether or not God loves us. We both accept that He does. The debate is whether or not God is, as you put it, "the victim of His own vengefulness". Becacause, as I see it, if God were constrained to deal with sin by violence, directed against whoever, even Himself, it would have made the whole of Jesus ministry, with its insistance on conquering evil by good, void. It would have been perpetuating the whole ugly lie, that might is right.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Addressing just this one point, I think that models other than PSA sidestep the depravity of the human condition caused by sin. The rot in our nature is so fundamental that God himself had to shed his own blood to reverse it.
I suppose that there are different conceptions of Christus Victor, but my understanding of it in no way does this. The rot in our nature is so fundamental that God himself had to come into the world, take on a human nature, and take on these evils one by one and overcome them to reverse it. At the end He overcame even the most fundamental natural love of survival itself, and the sins attached to it.
So in dying on the cross He was victorious over the power that wishes us to see our own survival as the number one priority.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pokrov
Shipmate
# 11515
|
Posted
JJ,
I agree with you.
Johnny has (rightly) pointed out that 'Sin' must not be reduced to some 'external/impersonal' entity which allows us to say, 'Well, the Devil made me do it...', but I've not heard anyone of us (who support CV) try to 'excuse' (in the real etymological sense of that word) human Sin.
Salvation may be MORE than individual, but it certainly isn't LESS! Human free will is totally in operation (both for good and for bad), yet the point of the CV thinking is that we are ALSO (in a way which imperceptably intertwins with free will) 'trapped' in a corrupt system.
PSA tells me that my personal culpability is 'dealt with', but beyond that it doesn't speak about how one can escape the corrupt system. As a legal model it speaks very well to individuals who commit moral crimes with full culpability, but it is silent on the cause/background of those crimes. Tough on crime, but not so tough on the causes of crime!
I was thinking last night that this debate probably needs to look at the interplay between 'enslavement' to sin and 'free will' to sin. But this will probably take us into Augstine-Pelagius territory!
On a side note, I would like to know from our Orthodox brethren/sistren how the Eastern fathers (and church) reconcile this seeming paradox?
--------------------
Most Holy Theotokos pray for us!
Posts: 1469 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Imaginary Friend
Real to you
# 186
|
Posted
I would like to ask a question about the CV in isolation from SA, if I may.
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider: quote:
Originally posted by Talitha:
How does his victory actually fix the problem of sin in our lives?
Just as He identified with us, so we identify with Him. Through the indwelling Holy Spirit we share His victory over sin.
8< ----- SNIP ----- 8<
Because humanity now has its reconciliation to God and His power through the one who is man and God. Evil gets its power over us through our weakness in the face of it, but in Christ we have one who can overcome it in us.
How are 'indwelling', and being 'in Christ' understood? Are they sacramental things? Is this why many people believe the Real Presence to be so important?
I'm currently trying to wade through the article linked to in the OP, but it's taking me a while! Perhaps my questions are answered there.
Many thanks.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
"We had a good team on paper. Unfortunately, the game was played on grass."
Brian Clough
Posts: 9455 | From: Left a bit... Right a bit... | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
How are 'indwelling', and being 'in Christ' understood? Are they sacramental things? Is this why many people believe the Real Presence to be so important?
That pretty much depends on their churchmanship. Evos would probably think of it in terms of a personal committment to Christ and regeneration by grace through faith, whilst those of more Catholic persuasion would indeed probably hold to a sacramental view. The advantage to being an Anglican is that you can hold to them both! ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pokrov
Shipmate
# 11515
|
Posted
JJ,
You're right, and this probably explains the differences of views over the atonement (something which I tried to develop on the 'Sin thread').
For those whose 'connection' to Christ is through 'rational' means (faith as belief/mental ascent) then the atonement fits better into a rational system (i.e. a legal one).
For those whose connection is sacramental, atonement language fits best into the therapeutic understanding.
The charismatics are a hard one to place since, they're often the opposite of the purely 'rational' (e.g. strict baptist) type, but not quite so 'physical' as the sacramentals (although there is a lot of crypto-sacramentalism within charismatic worship)! I guess they would exist along a continuum between both positions.
--------------------
Most Holy Theotokos pray for us!
Posts: 1469 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
(although there is a lot of crypto-sacramentalism within charismatic worship)
As a bona fide card carrying charismatic open-evo type with sacramentalist leanings, I can identify with this!
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Imaginary Friend
Real to you
# 186
|
Posted
I've been thinking about these issues a lot for the last few weeks (or since I started the atonement thread a while ago). I'm still confused! I'm pretty sure that my confusion is rooted in the fact that I was brought up a Nice Little Evo and I'm only just beginning to appreciate the limitations of this view of theology. I therefore have many, many hangups which I have to overcome.
I think my fundamental problem is that to me, CV seems to 'work very nicely' when describing humanity (or creation for that matter) as a whole, but SA seems to make much more sense from the point of view of each individual.
I can see that the fallen state of the universe is rectified by the incarnation and by Christ identifying himself with creation and causing the fundamental shift of paradigm which has been described earlier. But on the other hand, I find it hard to see how a God who surely cannot abide direct communion with sinners can allow himself to take them 'into Him' without compromising Himself. Surely the justification of the individual has to happen before the God can receive? Surely the problem of sin has to be dealt with while there is still some distance between God and the individual? I can see how that happens in SA, but not in CV.
--------------------
"We had a good team on paper. Unfortunately, the game was played on grass."
Brian Clough
Posts: 9455 | From: Left a bit... Right a bit... | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
[/QUOTE]Part of the problem here, ISTM, is that there is a tendency7 to critique models of Atonement other than PSA through the lens of PSA. Thus rejection of PSA is often seen by its proponents as necessarily a rejection of a lot of other concepts not actually inherent in PSA, but more generally evangelical. Thus, I have no problem with agreeing with you, Jamat, that Jesus' death was a precondition for our reconciliation to God. What I don't see is why, if this is a given, that CV in any way sidesteps the problem of sin. It's not our view of the toxicity of sin that divides us, but our view of the nature of the remedy, our view, if you like, of how the Atonement "works".
... as I see it, if God were constrained to deal with sin by violence, directed against whoever, even Himself, it would have made the whole of Jesus ministry, with its insistance on conquering evil by good, void. It would have been perpetuating the whole ugly lie, that might is right. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Fair observation. Do not all of us tend to critique opponents of our view with our own particular tint of spectacle? You, JJ, regard PSA as a violent model because of your preconceptions and definition of violence I think.
However, The issue for me is what scripture clearly states about Jesus' blood. One cannot, in my view, do anything other than believe the apostles saw the shedding of blood as a necessary precondition for forgiveness and imputed righteousness. The OT clearly prefigures the blood atonement concept in many places but particularly in the Passover celebration where an innocent lamb was slaughtered. The sinfulness issue required the death, yhe shedding of blood. This is why I maintain that any model which denies this, really doesn't recognise the seriousness of sin.
However, the issue here is not my or your opinion, it is the
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
]Originally posted by Jamat:
Part of the problem here, ISTM, is that there is a tendency7 to critique models of Atonement other than PSA through the lens of PSA. Thus rejection of PSA is often seen by its proponents as necessarily a rejection of a lot of other concepts not actually inherent in PSA, but more generally evangelical. Thus, I have no problem with agreeing with you, Jamat, that Jesus' death was a precondition for our reconciliation to God. What I don't see is why, if this is a given, that CV in any way sidesteps the problem of sin. It's not our view of the toxicity of sin that divides us, but our view of the nature of the remedy, our view, if you like, of how the Atonement "works".
... as I see it, if God were constrained to deal with sin by violence, directed against whoever, even Himself, it would have made the whole of Jesus ministry, with its insistance on conquering evil by good, void. It would have been perpetuating the whole ugly lie, that might is right.[/QUOTE]
Fair observation. Do not all of us tend to critique opponents of our view with our own particular tint of spectacle? You, JJ, regard PSA as a violent model because of your preconceptions and definition of violence I think.
However, The issue for me is what scripture clearly states about Jesus' blood. One cannot, in my view, do anything other than believe the apostles saw the shedding of blood as a necessary precondition for forgiveness and imputed righteousness. The OT clearly prefigures the blood atonement concept in many places but particularly in the Passover celebration where an innocent lamb was slaughtered. The sinfulness issue required the death, yhe shedding of blood. This is why I maintain that any model which denies this, really doesn't recognise the seriousness of sin.
However, the issue here is not my or your opinion, it is the [/QUOTE]
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
quote:
]Originally posted by Jamat:
Part of the problem here, ISTM, is that there is a tendency7 to critique models of Atonement other than PSA through the lens of PSA. Thus rejection of PSA is often seen by its proponents as necessarily a rejection of a lot of other concepts not actually inherent in PSA, but more generally evangelical. Thus, I have no problem with agreeing with you, Jamat, that Jesus' death was a precondition for our reconciliation to God. What I don't see is why, if this is a given, that CV in any way sidesteps the problem of sin. It's not our view of the toxicity of sin that divides us, but our view of the nature of the remedy, our view, if you like, of how the Atonement "works".
... as I see it, if God were constrained to deal with sin by violence, directed against whoever, even Himself, it would have made the whole of Jesus ministry, with its insistance on conquering evil by good, void. It would have been perpetuating the whole ugly lie, that might is right.
Fair observation. Do not all of us tend to critique opponents of our view with our own particular tint of spectacle? You, JJ, regard PSA as a violent model because of your preconceptions and definition of violence I think.
However, the issue here is not my or your opinion, it is what scripture clearly states about Jesus' blood. One cannot, in my view, do anything other than believe the apostles saw the shedding of blood as a necessary precondition for forgiveness and imputed righteousness. The OT clearly prefigures the blood atonement concept in many places but particularly in the Passover celebration where an innocent lamb was slaughtered. The sinfulness issue required the death, yhe shedding of blood. This is why I maintain that any model which denies this, really doesn't recognise the seriousness of sin.
[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]
--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)
Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
But on the other hand, I find it hard to see how a God who surely cannot abide direct communion with sinners can allow himself to take them 'into Him' without compromising Himself. Surely the justification of the individual has to happen before the God can receive? Surely the problem of sin has to be dealt with while there is still some distance between God and the individual? I can see how that happens in SA, but not in CV.
I realise there is a lot of evo back-story to this idea that somehow God cannot abide direct communion with sinners, but I must say that I don't see that there is much biblical evidence for this. It is certainly true that for sinful people communion with God is problematic, but the difficulty is all on our side, not His. If this were not the case, then how could the sinless Son of God find that the company most congenial to Him was that of criminals, prostitutes and traitors (well, OK, an exaggeration maybe, but it's what He was accused of by His enemies). The thing is, God doesn't have a problem with moral guilt. He has a way of dealing with it which is the same today as it has always been. That way is forgiveness. The Atonement at a personal level is not, it seems to me, about forgiveness (and hence about moral guilt) but about reconciliation, the transformation of the individual. As Freddy put it, He's not concerned about apportioning blame for the system going wrong. He just wants to fix it.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
However, The issue for me is what scripture clearly states about Jesus' blood. One cannot, in my view, do anything other than believe the apostles saw the shedding of blood as a necessary precondition for forgiveness and imputed righteousness. The OT clearly prefigures the blood atonement concept in many places but particularly in the Passover celebration where an innocent lamb was slaughtered. The sinfulness issue required the death, the shedding of blood.
Just an historical question: did the Jewish people ever believe that the lamb that was killed on Passover was intended as a sacrifice for the sins of the Jewish people? I know that a lamb was killed and eaten before the Jewish people left Egypt, but it was not presented as a sin sacrifice -- the blood was simply a sign for the angel of death, and the meal was needed for the long march.
Certainly, in Christian iconography, the Lamb of God has become a sacrifice for sin. But were the real lambs of Passover ever intended as such by the Jewish people? Or was it more intended as a remembrance of God delivering His people than as an act of contrition by those people?
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
Jamat, you wrote:
quote:
Do not all of us tend to critique opponents of our view with our own particular tint of spectacle? You, JJ, regard PSA as a violent model because of your preconceptions and definition of violence I think.
Well this may well be generally true, but the point I was making was, not that it is necessarily bad that we do this, as long as we are aware that this is what we are doing, but rather, that it means we are more likely to attribute to our opponents views that they don't necessarily hold. Thus, I oppose concept A you consider it essential, for reasons B,C,D and E. The temptation is to believe that, because I dispute concept A, I also dispute concepts B,C,D, and E. Now, of course, I may so dispute them, but it is equally possible that I could hold them, and merely dispute the association which you believe exists between them and concept A.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
