homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | Register | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Community discussion   » Purgatory   » Moral Influence atonement theology (Page 26)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  23  24  25  26 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Moral Influence atonement theology
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I was just about to propose that very thing ...

[Big Grin] [Biased]

If I might be so bold (presumptuous even), it seems to me that if we head too far Eastwards, as it were, we end up with a position where the atonement becomes unnecessary and meaningless. Anyone remember Myrrh? Ok, she was 'non-canonical Orthodox' - and among what struck me as some rather eccentric emphases she appeared to argue for a position where the atonement was unnecessary.

Indeed, I took the trouble of discussing some of her posts with Fr Gregory (who'd stopped posting here by that time) and he found them decidedly odd.

'The Orthodox have a very developed theology of the atonement,' he assured me.

Conversely, if we head too far 'West' we end up toppling to an equal and opposite extreme where all that matters is a particular juridical understanding of the atonement and theosis, union with Christ and so on barely come into the equation.

In some ways, one could argue that the Wesleyan position - which is cognisant of both - brokers some kind of middle-ground between those extremes.

Except ... it isn't as easy as that of course.

I don't claim any greater consistency than Mudfrog on this one. It strikes me that he wants his cake and eat it.

One moment he's telling us that the Orthodox position is irrelevant because it's a minority presence here in the West ... and the next he's taking mr cheesy, Kwesi and Martin60 to task for shifting things away from 'what the Church has always believed ...'

With one breath he insists, 'the Bible says ...' and with the other, 'the Church has always believed ...'

When it is quite apparent that what the Bible says on these issues is open to interpretation and that what he thinks 'the Church has always believed' isn't necessarily the case. The Orthodox have been round a pretty long time and it's hard to demonstrate that they ever believed in PSA, for instance - although there are one or two Patristic quotes that could be understood that way were one so inclined ...

Lest it appear that I am singling Mudfrog out for censure, I hasten to add that I muddy the waters with ecclesial / theological flip-flopping and dangling my feet in the puddle from my perch on a spiky fence ...

I think the most we can say is:

- The Church has always believed in the atonement.

- The Church has never battened down and defined what that actually means in detail: there's never been an Ecumenical Council that has sat down to thrash out the matter.

Therefore, it must follow that a range of views, models and metaphors are 'permissible' providing they don't do violence to the scriptural texts nor to received and accepted tradition (or Tradition).

That doesn't mean that it's all up for grabs, but it does mean that there's a degree of wriggle-room.

Or so it seems to me ...

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15406 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
*the Wesleyan in me greets the Wesleyan in you, Gamaliel* [Biased]

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 10913 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Once you start down the road of 'Did Jesus really say...?' you might as well give up.

On the contrary, that is where theology starts.

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23024 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Nice. As was the original radical proposal re atonement prior to proposing kenosis. Can I go all Gamaliel on you and propose both?

Nope. Kenosis is a sine qua non.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
'The Orthodox have a very developed theology of the atonement,' he assured me.

That seems so unlikely. That the Orthodox have a very developed theology of anything other than the contents of the Creed and hesychasm. Heck, our theology of the change in the Eucharistic elements is, "it's a mystery; deal with it."

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
You'd have to take that up with him.

It could be that I've misquoted him - he might have said 'understanding of' rather than 'theology of' ... At any rate, he certainly wasn't saying that the Orthodox are indifferent to the atonement.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15406 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Nice. As was the original radical proposal re atonement prior to proposing kenosis. Can I go all Gamaliel on you and propose both?

Nope. Kenosis is a sine qua non.
Dang. Consider me kenosed.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16623 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Nice. As was the original radical proposal re atonement prior to proposing kenosis. Can I go all Gamaliel on you and propose both?

Nope. Kenosis is a sine qua non.
Dang. Consider me kenosed.
It's about time.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
So here's my question to you "atonement is ancient and you're a punk" types.

What is the Greek word that we translate as "atonement"? What is the Latin word that we translate as "atonement"? What is the Hebrew or Aramaic word that we translate as "atonement"?

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
How about hilasmos? Strongs 2434 λασμός, 1 John 2:2

I understand the root is used elsewhere too.

--------------------
overheard on a Welsh bus-stop: Jesus don't care about you, he's only interested in your soul

Posts: 9830 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm not saying you are a punk, nor am I saying that the word 'atonement' is of ancient provenance ...

Someone's already said somewhere on this thread that the word is of more recent coinage.

If I wanted to, I could go all 'Kaplan' on you and ask where the word 'Trinity' appears in the NT ...

The point isn't whether the term is ancient but whether the various concepts of the atonement can legitimately be derived from the scriptures and Patriarch sources. It seems to me that it can ... As the scriptures and the Father's use various figures and images, models and metaphors to describe what God in Christ has achieved for humanity ...

It also seems 'safer' to me to hold these various models more gently and loosely than we have tended to do in the Latin West with our penchant for juridical models and for filleting everything up into sound-bites and slogans ...

Yes, we can learn from the Christian East in that respect. That doesn't mean that we should abandon any attempt to understand or express ideas about these things.

Sure, the default Orthodox response to any great Mystery of Faith, be it the Incarnation, the Eucharist or whatever else is to say, 'It's a Mystery, suck it up and roll with it ...'

Which is fair enough. Just don't bleat if some people want to enjoy the ride as much as you do but also to work out something of how the gears and sprockets on the switch-back railway function at the same time ...

Shoot, I've seen you analyse films or pieces of music online. That seems to add to your appreciation of each. You don't simply switch off your critical faculties and think, 'I'm enjoying the movie, therefore I won't ask any questions about the plot, the cinematography, the casting, the music, the edits and cuts ...'

Ultimately of course, the whole thing is a Mystery. But people being people, we want to get a handle on things. Hence these discussions.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15406 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Gamaliel averred:
Which is fair enough. Just don't bleat if some people want to enjoy the ride as much as you do but also to work out something of how the gears and sprockets on the switch-back railway function at the same time ...

FFS I didn't bleat at all. Perhaps you haven't noticed but I am holding up my end of the theological chop shop bargain that is this thread. I'm not running around like Chicken Little saying "Oooh, it's a mystery, you guys stop all this theologizing already!" FFS.

Nevertheless I think it's a valid question whether or not "the atonement" isn't a late invention that has been read back into the Scriptures and the Fathers. You may think it's obvious that it's not; from this it does not follow that I am "bleating."

I didn't ask for a word from Scripture, but for a word, any word, from antiquity. If there isn't a word for something, it's likely people weren't talking about it. The Greek original of "Trinity" arguably dates back to 170. So comparing "atonement" to "Trinity" just doesn't hunt.

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
How about hilasmos? Strongs 2434 λασμός, 1 John 2:2

I understand the root is used elsewhere too.

Well just going from Strong's and the English meaning of "propitiation" and "appeasement" (Strong's translations), Christ makes God happy with us. To appease is to "pacify or placate (someone) by acceding to their demands" and to propitiate is to "win or regain the favor of (a god, spirit, or person) by doing something that pleases them." We're back in the territory we thought we had left behind where the gods needed us to do something to make them happy before they would give us good crops, good weather, or whatever.

And yet. And yet. If we look at the previous verse (1 John 2:1) we are told we have an advocate before the father -- a legal term seemingly meaning we have a barrister. That should color how we read the next verse, I should think. And an advocate/barrister is not someone who makes the judge happy by killing bulls (or dying himself), but who brings the judge over to his side by showing that his case is correct before the law.

It seems that these two verses alone would take their own thread and maybe one or two others to unpack. But I'm not sure that either alone or both together make up what we have been discussing as "atonement." At best 2:2 is raw material, not unlike the suffering servant passage from Isaiah, for discussing models of the atonement.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I'm beginning to wonder if there was no atonement. It's a made-up word. Is it a made-up concept? Maybe we're talking about the wrong thing. Perhaps this is why the Orfies are so vague on the subject, at least according to the atonement-chasers of the West. What matters is theosis, not some chimerical "atonement."

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
So here's my question to you "atonement is ancient and you're a punk" types.

What is the Greek word that we translate as "atonement"? What is the Latin word that we translate as "atonement"? What is the Hebrew or Aramaic word that we translate as "atonement"?

I'm not sure "atonement" is so much a translation of a Greek, Latin, Hebrew or Aramaic word as it is an original English construction to name a theological concept. But it seems to me that it at least echoes or is somewhat synonymous with what is translated from the Greek as "reconciling," or "reconciliation."

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2443 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
I'm not sure "atonement" is so much a translation of a Greek, Latin, Hebrew or Aramaic word as it is an original English construction to name a theological concept.

Right. And my point is that if people didn't have a word for something, was it something they talked about? Something they believed in? The ancient Church was boffo at creating names for things. Greek and Latin both seem downright perfect for new coinages. If there is no antecedent for "atonement," is it a concept that existed before Tyndale?

Of course very often something exists before someone thinks up a word for it. But usually it doesn't take a millenium and a half for the word to appear.

quote:
But it seems to me that it at least echoes or is somewhat synonymous with what is translated from the Greek as "reconciling," or "reconciliation."
Literally to make the till come out even.

Okay so now we have as possible antecedents katalasso (from 2Cor) and hilasmos (from 1Jn). Both may have the root "las" but I'm no Greek scholar. Where's Lamb Chopped when you need her?

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Good question. I don't know the answer to that, maybe we need to try to find more resources to see if we can shed light on whether the early church was using a word for the thing we now discuss as the atonement - and whether that word had any wider resonance.

I suppose it is possible that writers such as Clement were riffing on aspects of this without perhaps seeking to codify it into something, if that's what you mean. I'd be quite interested to know the Greek words Clem was using in Chapter 16 of that letter and how that relates to the various terms we have for aspects of the atonement in the NT. I'm not sure how to find out that information.

--------------------
overheard on a Welsh bus-stop: Jesus don't care about you, he's only interested in your soul

Posts: 9830 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
I'm not sure "atonement" is so much a translation of a Greek, Latin, Hebrew or Aramaic word as it is an original English construction to name a theological concept.

Right. And my point is that if people didn't have a word for something, was it something they talked about? Something they believed in? The ancient Church was boffo at creating names for things. Greek and Latin both seem downright perfect for new coinages. If there is no antecedent for "atonement," is it a concept that existed before Tyndale?

Of course very often something exists before someone thinks up a word for it. But usually it doesn't take a millenium and a half for the word to appear.

But many of the various understandings/metaphors for the atonement—ransom, CV, moral influence, for example—certainly predate the word's coinage in the early 1550s. What did Anselm of Canterbury understand that he was describing 400 years earlier, before the word "atonement" was coined?

It would be interesting to read the older English texts. The fact that "atonement" was only coined in the 1500s doesn't mean there weren't earlier words for the same idea. It could mean it replaced those earlier, possibly foreign, words. There's ample precedent for that in the history of English—Old English in particular but later English as well.

There is also the Jewish antecedent of kippur, as in Yom Kippur, usually translated as "Day of Atonement." It comes from a root (kappuret) that means "cover" and refers to the covering of the Ark of the Covenant.

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2443 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
But many of the various understandings/metaphors for the atonement—ransom, CV, moral influence, for example—certainly predate the word's coinage in the early 1550s. What did Anselm of Canterbury understand that he was describing 400 years earlier, before the word "atonement" was coined?

Mmm. I don't know that either, it would be interesting to know the words they were using.

Clearly from the earliest times people were talking about the work of Christ on the cross and to me the difference between that and a developing doctrine of the atonement is quite a fine one. It isn't simply that the English term "atonement" popped into existence and thus spurred a bunch of people to wonder what was going on, people had written about that subject without maybe totally defining what they were talking about for centuries.

--------------------
overheard on a Welsh bus-stop: Jesus don't care about you, he's only interested in your soul

Posts: 9830 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
'The Orthodox have a very developed theology of the atonement,' he assured me.

That seems so unlikely. That the Orthodox have a very developed theology of anything other than the contents of the Creed and hesychasm. Heck, our theology of the change in the Eucharistic elements is, "it's a mystery; deal with it."
Which is pretty much where my tribe has ended up on the atonement/reconciling work of God in Christ:

quote:
God's reconciling act in Jesus Christ is a mystery which the Scriptures describe in various ways. It is called the sacrifice of a lamb, a shepherd's life given for his sheep, atonement by a priest; again it is ransom of a slave, payment of a debt, vicarious satisfaction of a legal penalty, and victory over the powers of evil. These are expressions of a truth which remains beyond the reach of all theory in the depths of God's love for man. They reveal the gravity, cost, and sure achievement of God's reconciling work.
The Confession of 1967

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2443 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
It would be interesting to read the older English texts. The fact that "atonement" was only coined in the 1500s doesn't mean there weren't earlier words for the same idea. It could mean it replaced those earlier, possibly foreign, words.

And that's what I was asking for. What are those words?

quote:
There is also the Jewish antecedent of kippur, as in Yom Kippur, usually translated as "Day of Atonement." It comes from a root (kappuret) that means "cover" and refers to the covering of the Ark of the Covenant.
Yes, but how did it come to be translated "atonement"? I'm not sure Christians would describe "atonement" as "covering". Wouldn't we say that God doesn't cover our sins, but blots them out? Maybe not. For "cover" I get the idea of God putting something over them so he doesn't see them. But I imagine them still underneath the tarpaulin, writhing around like nasty worms. Clearly the Jews don't see it that way. But also clearly, to me, they don't see "atonement" the same way we do.

quote:
[quote from] The Confession of 1967
Yes that's kind of how I picture it. Something happened that freed us from the eternal results of our sins, and restored our right relationship with God. And it's like all of those things, but it isn't exactly any of them. It's a mystery that we can paint a more-or-less abstract picture of by these admittedly imperfect analogies.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ok Mousethief, you win ...

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15406 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Ok Mousethief, you win ...

[Disappointed]

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116

 - Posted      Profile for Mudfrog   Email Mudfrog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The word atonement is at-one-ment. The process of being made at one with the father.

The thing about the cover on the ark is that it was called the mercy seat and our sins are placed there and covered with the blood of the animal.

God figuratively sees the blood and is satisfied.
Similarly, the blood of Jesus covers our sin and we are seen as holy in his sight.

--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 8106 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
The word atonement is at-one-ment. The process of being made at one with the father.

Yes. And there is no word in any other language that means "at-one-ment." It does not translate any Greek or Latin word because it was made up of whole cloth. Making it quite suspect.

Is this an invented word for an invented concept? Hardly anybody has tried to even answer this question, and the answers have been inconclusive. If "propitiation" or "appeasement" were good enough to describe the concept, why invent a new word, one with a quite different meaning from either of those words? "Covering" doesn't mean "to make one with" either.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
FWIW, mousethief, I have heard "cover" language used with reference to Christian understanding of the sacrifice of Christ. I can't recall specifically where or how, I'm afraid.

With regard to your bigger question, I'm afraid I just don't know what earlier words there might have been, or if there were earlier words at all. What little reading on it I have been able to do makes me wonder if there were earlier words at all—though one etymology of "atonement" I looked at said it may have been a translation of or influenced by the Medieval Latin adunamentum, while another noted that the English atonen is a few hundred years older than "atonement."

I do wonder if earlier writers were content with more generic terms, such "salvation," "redemption," or "reconciling/saving work of Christ," while those influenced by the medieval Western urge to explore the "how" found themselves wanting a more specific term.

Maybe? Just a speculation.

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2443 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
I do wonder if earlier writers were content with more generic terms, such "salvation," "redemption," or "reconciling/saving work of Christ," while those influenced by the medieval Western urge to explore the "how" found themselves wanting a more specific term.

Maybe? Just a speculation.

Just a speculation, but the best we've had so far, I think.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Here's the skinny from etymonline, who does his homework pretty well, although the numbers here look a little odd.

atone (v.)
1550s, from adverbial phrase atonen (c. 1300) "in accord," literally "at one," a contraction of at and one. It retains the older pronunciation of one. The phrase perhaps is modeled on Latin adunare "unite," from ad "to, at" (see ad-) + unum "one." Related: Atoned; atoning.

atonement (n.)
1510s, "condition of being at one (with others)," from atone + -ment. Meaning "reconciliation" (especially of sinners with God) is from 1520s; that of "propitiation of an offended party" is from 1610s.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Is this an invented word for an invented concept?

That seems far-fetched to me, given that the concept was written about extensively before the word was coined. Are you getting up on the very English construct of "at-one-ment"? It seems to me that atonement means very much what reconciliation does, at least in modern English and in a theological context.

quote:
Hardly anybody has tried to even answer this question, and the answers have been inconclusive. If "propitiation" or "appeasement" were good enough to describe the concept, why invent a new word, one with a quite different meaning from either of those words?
Well a few answers come to mind. The first is that having multiple words to choose from for the same thing or same idea is a hallmark of English compared to other languages.

And are we sure that "propitiation" and "appeasement" had come into English, with their current meanings, when "atonement" was coined. As best I can tell, "reconcile" may not have had quite that meaning yet.

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2443 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
"Propitiate" dates from 1580 so you nailed that. "Appease" is c. 1300. "Reconcile" mid 14th c. But of course none of those mean "at one" or "make to be at one."

"Unify" dates from 1500, so right about the same time as "atone." "Unite" is 100 years older. "Join" dates to about 1300. "Conjoin," late 14th century.

Was there a need for "atone"? When we talk about "atonement" do we talk about passages and patristics that refer to unifying us with God, or that refer to Jesus pacifying God?

[ 18. February 2017, 22:17: Message edited by: mousethief ]

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Was there a need for "atone"? When we talk about "atonement" do we talk about passages and patristics that refer to unifying us with God, or that refer to Jesus pacifying God?

In my experience, when we talk about atonement with God, we are talking about being reconciled with God. One definition of "reconcile" is " to bring into agreement or harmony."

FWIW, since I think Tyndale may be who we have to thank for "atonement," and since I cited 2 Cor. 5:19 above for the language of God reconciling the world to himself in Christ, I thought I'd see how Tyndale translated that phrase. He has, in that verse and the previous verse:

quote:
18Nevertheless all things are of God, which hath reconciled us unto himself by Iesus Christ, and hath given unto us the office to preach the atonement. 19For God was in Christ, and made agreement between the world and him self, and imputed not their sins unto them: and hath committed to us the preaching of the atonement.
Here, the words translated as "reconciled," "made agreement" and "atonement" are all forms of the Greek katalasso.

Which now raises the question for me—was "atonement" coined to meet a perceived need for theological discourse or was it coined to meet a perceived translation need?

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2443 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
Which now raises the question for me—was "atonement" coined to meet a perceived need for theological discourse or was it coined to meet a perceived translation need?

Well they had "reconciliation" -- what better way to translate the noun that goes with "reconcile"? Unless Tyndale was just too poncy to use words that looked so similar so close together, and needed a synonym, and found there wasn't one?

We know he invented "passover" because he didn't want to use the same word for the Hebrew holiday/event as the Christians were using for the Feast of the Resurrection (some derivative of pesach), even though the Christians stole the word from the Jews to begin with, and that's what's in the Hebrew text. He had his little problems.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I should clarify—Tyndale's use of "atonement" appears to be a translation of logos (word) of katallages (usually translated "reconciliation" now).

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2443 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think my point stands. He had the word "reconciliation." Why didn't he use it? Why invent a new one?

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
Which now raises the question for me—was "atonement" coined to meet a perceived need for theological discourse or was it coined to meet a perceived translation need?

Well they had "reconciliation" -- what better way to translate the noun that goes with "reconcile"? Unless Tyndale was just too poncy to use words that looked so similar so close together, and needed a synonym, and found there wasn't one?

I don't know. Maybe he didn't think "reconciliation" was in common, vernacular use? Maybe he wanted an Anglo-Saxon-derived word that, though new, he thought would be better understood? I don't know, though again, it's hardly unique in English.

But regardless, questioning his use of a new word rather than an existing one is a very different thing from suggesting it is a made-up word for a made-up concept.

Many have found "atonement" to be a useful word to mean God's reconciling activity in Christ. That you may not find it useful, especially in an Orthodox context, is okay.

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2443 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601

 - Posted      Profile for Steve Langton   Email Steve Langton   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
by Mousethief;
quote:
Well they had "reconciliation" -- what better way to translate the noun that goes with "reconcile"? Unless Tyndale was just too poncy to use words that looked so similar so close together, and needed a synonym, and found there wasn't one? We know he invented "passover" because he didn't want to use the same word for the Hebrew holiday/event as the Christians were using for the Feast of the Resurrection (some derivative of pesach), even though the Christians stole the word from the Jews to begin with, and that's what's in the Hebrew text. He had his little problems.
As I understand it Tyndale was trying to produce a translation as much as possible in colloquial English rather than scholarly Latinate or Greek-derived words. "Passover" would appear to be a rendering of the purpose of the rite into English, in commemorating the 'passing over' of the Hebrews by the angel of death.

Atonement AIUI is simply "at-one-ment", bringing together people separated and in need of reconciliation. Colloquial but perhaps not always absolutely accurate rendering of the original?

Back then I guess there are cases where someone like Tyndale didn't actually invent a word but may have been the first person to both write it down and it be preserved...?

Posts: 2097 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013  |  IP: Logged
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296

 - Posted      Profile for Jolly Jape   Email Jolly Jape   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, it's a common feature in evo circles to point out atonement means at-one-ment, and it seems at least likely that Tyndale, in view of the fact that he was producing the first vernacular English Bible from the original languages, wanted a word of distictly English construction. Compound words were a feature of early modern English carried over from its Germanic roots. I think he was just trying to get a somewhat specialist concept across in the most effective way to native English speakers, and it's over-thinking it to speculate at more theologically partisan motives.

--------------------
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
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549

 - Posted      Profile for Dafyd   Email Dafyd   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
What did Anselm of Canterbury understand that he was describing 400 years earlier, before the word "atonement" was coined?

He titled his work 'why God became man'. That looks a bit of a flippant answer, but I think it's worth saying. Just because a writer has what we now call a theory of the atonement doesn't mean that had they written a systematic theology they would have had a heading 'the atonement'.

Case in point: Aquinas. The Summa Theologica has the questions (T.1.2.): 'whether it was necessary for the restoration of the human race that the word of God became incarnate'? (*)
He then later on (T.46.1) asks 'whether it was necessary for Christ to suffer for the deliverance of the human race'?
Then 'whether Christ brought about our salvation by way of': (T.48.1) 'merit'?/ (T.48.2) "atonement" in the English translation online - the Latin is 'satisfactio'?/ (T.48.3) 'sacrifice'?/ (T.48.4) 'redemption'? (Answer in each case: yes.)
Note that he doesn't use any single word to cover every way in which Jesus' incarnation and redemption save us.

(*) Note that for Aquinas the incarnation has its own importance: he gives several broadly moral influence reasons, and also he cites (from Augustine) 'God became man so that man might become God'.

--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams

Posts: 10309 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Thanks Dafyd.

As for a preference for Germanic over Greek or Latin words for things church-related, that goes back to the introduction of Christianity to the Anglo-Saxons. It's how we got lots of words we still use, including "Lord" and "heaven." Not saying Latin words didn't come in as well, but often there was a preference for finding an English equivalent.

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2443 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Again this doesn't answer my question -- why "reconcile" but not "reconciliation"? If Latin words were so horrid, why change the noun but keep the verb? "Atone" as a backformation from "atonement" is roughly coeval with "atonement" and Tyndale was certainly smart enough to make the leap.

I dunno. This is definitely a siding. Back to the mainline. How are we reconciled to God? The Orthodox believe there are three things that separated us from God: death, sin, and nature. By combining in himself the human and divine natures (i.e. by the Incarnation), Christ overcame the third. By dying (Crucifixion) he overcame the second. By rising (Resurrection) he overcame the first. Thus: We are reconciled by Christ's Incarnation, Crucifixion, and Resurrection.

Next question.

(See? Once you use non-obfuscatory words, the whole world opens up.)

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Again this doesn't answer my question -- why "reconcile" but not "reconciliation"? If Latin words were so horrid, why change the noun but keep the verb? "Atone" as a backformation from "atonement" is roughly coeval with "atonement" and Tyndale was certainly smart enough to make the leap.

I don't know that anyone here can answer your question, or to use a Latin-derived word, your inquiry. [Biased] . Speculation is the best we can do, probably.

That said, I don't see why the word itself is a problem, unless the word is identified with a specific theory or model.

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2443 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I guess the problem I have is that I know exactly what "reconciliation" means but am not at all clear (nor, would it seem, is anybody on this thread) what "atonement" means.


quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
I don't know that anyone here can answer your question, or to use a Latin-derived word, your inquiry.

Question is also a Latin word. The germanic-derived word would be "asking."

Wonder if it's time to resurrect or recreate that Circus thread where players try to keep a conversation going using only words of old English/Germanic provenance.

[ 18. February 2017, 23:37: Message edited by: mousethief ]

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Nick Tamen

Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164

 - Posted      Profile for Nick Tamen     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Duh. I need a face palm icon. You are indeed correct about "question," "inquiry" and "asking."

But where has there been any confusion about what "atonement" means. I haven't seen anyone question what it means. I've seen lots of discussion and disagreement about the specifics of how it works.

[ 18. February 2017, 23:44: Message edited by: Nick Tamen ]

--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott

Posts: 2443 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
But where has there been any confusion about what "atonement" means. I haven't seen anyone question what it means. I've seen lots of discussion and disagreement
Very good discussion too! I think the issue comes back to his earlier query.

"Is this an invented word for an invented concept?"

You have so far established that it is a word coined, probably to try and nail an idea and now there is a need to nail the nail.
The concept is comprehensible enough though. God and man were at odds. Now, through the cross, they aren't. (If, of course it is accepted.)

[ 19. February 2017, 03:10: Message edited by: Jamat ]

Posts: 2967 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812

 - Posted      Profile for Gamaliel   Author's homepage   Email Gamaliel   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think Mousethief's point Jamat, is that it isn't 'just' by the cross but by Christ's life (incarnation), death (the cross) and resurrection.

We aren't to overly fuss and fiddle over the precise mechanics of each. Nor can we isolate or emphasise any one aspect over the others. We take them as a whole.

--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.

http://philthebard.blogspot.com

Posts: 15406 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Nice. As was the original radical proposal re atonement prior to proposing kenosis. Can I go all Gamaliel on you and propose both?

Nope. Kenosis is a sine qua non.
Dang. Consider me kenosed.
It's about time.
My cultic Western ignorance, even of understated (aye, and there's the rub) Western divinization, knows no bounds.

I allergically reacted to theosis 15 years ago, to its 'blasphemy' and as much has been pruned since I now find that has.

Thank you for bearing with me AGAIN all this time mousethief.

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16623 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
You have so far established that it is a word coined, probably to try and nail an idea and now there is a need to nail the nail.

Yes. I made peace with this. Scroll up.

quote:
The concept is comprehensible enough though. God and man were at odds. Now, through the cross, they aren't. (If, of course it is accepted.)
"At odds"? The way you word this presupposes your answer is the right one. Kinda circular. I would rather say we were separated from God. As per my post which you missed by scrolling too fast. See my last paragraph in this post.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Martin, you make a good deal of fuss out of a throw-away joke, but there is some truth behind it. Theosis just means becoming like God. We and the west disagree on the mechanism (here is where we get accused of being semi-pelagian or downright pelagian) and its relationship to "justification" (the west tends to bifurcate "justification" and "sanctification" where we tend to see them as a seamless whole).

And no-one is fully theosisized in this life, by and large. There we will see clearly. Here, the glass remains darkly.

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
That's me mate, an overreactor in my own armchair to my own narrative. Dumb with it: what was the joke? "It's about time."? Must be. I'm just cringingly aware of my reaction - "BLASPHEMY!" - of at least 10 years ago. Inflated egos are tenuous, fragile.

[ 20. February 2017, 19:29: Message edited by: Martin60 ]

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 16623 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Inflated egos are tenuous, fragile.

Don't I know it.

[ 21. February 2017, 02:32: Message edited by: mousethief ]

--------------------
God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean. --Acts 10:28

Posts: 62953 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  23  24  25  26 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
Check out Reform magazine
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
  ship of fools