Atonement model?

Christian ethics and theology with an Anabaptist perspective
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23826
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Atonement model?

Post by Josh »

ohio jones wrote:
buckeyematt2 wrote:But God did not kill His Son; men killed Him
Just a minor correction to an otherwise well reasoned post: Men did not kill Jesus, though they nailed him to the cross; he laid down his life, which as the author of life he had the power to do.
John 10:11-18, 1 John 3:16
That seems a bit odd. Did he commit suicide?

The shepherd lays down his life for the sheep, but the wolf still is killing the shepherd.
0 x
Hats Off
Posts: 2532
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:42 pm
Affiliation: Plain Menno OO

Re: Atonement model?

Post by Hats Off »

Josh wrote:
ohio jones wrote:
buckeyematt2 wrote:But God did not kill His Son; men killed Him
Just a minor correction to an otherwise well reasoned post: Men did not kill Jesus, though they nailed him to the cross; he laid down his life, which as the author of life he had the power to do.
John 10:11-18, 1 John 3:16
That seems a bit odd. Did he commit suicide?

The shepherd lays down his life for the sheep, but the wolf still is killing the shepherd.
This why I have such a distaste for theology.
0 x
silentreader
Posts: 2511
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 9:41 pm
Affiliation: MidWest Fellowship

Re: Atonement model?

Post by silentreader »

Hats Off wrote:
Josh wrote:
ohio jones wrote: Just a minor correction to an otherwise well reasoned post: Men did not kill Jesus, though they nailed him to the cross; he laid down his life, which as the author of life he had the power to do.
John 10:11-18, 1 John 3:16
That seems a bit odd. Did he commit suicide?

The shepherd lays down his life for the sheep, but the wolf still is killing the shepherd.
This why I have such a distaste for theology.
HO, theology really doesn't have to be like that. True theology can be uplifting and encouraging. Unfortunately here om MN it is too often confusing and exasperating.
0 x
Noah was a conspiracy theorist...and then it began to rain.~Unknown
joshuabgood
Posts: 2815
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 5:23 pm
Affiliation: BMA

Re: Atonement model?

Post by joshuabgood »

What is "true theology?"

Is it Piper and Mohler's reformed theology?
0 x
silentreader
Posts: 2511
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 9:41 pm
Affiliation: MidWest Fellowship

Re: Atonement model?

Post by silentreader »

joshuabgood wrote:What is "true theology?"

Is it Piper and Mohler's reformed theology?
"confusing and exasperating," thanks for making my point.
0 x
Noah was a conspiracy theorist...and then it began to rain.~Unknown
joshuabgood
Posts: 2815
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 5:23 pm
Affiliation: BMA

Re: Atonement model?

Post by joshuabgood »

silentreader wrote:
joshuabgood wrote:What is "true theology?"

Is it Piper and Mohler's reformed theology?
"confusing and exasperating," thanks for making my point.
Hi Silent Reader - not trying to be snippy here...I am just trying to hear from you what constitutes "true theology?" There are differing theological "families." I didn't mean to insult you by noting Mohler and Piper. (They are just commonly read in the moderate conservative and fundamental circles...

If you don't mind - could you explain what you meant by "true theology?"

Thanks,
0 x
silentreader
Posts: 2511
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 9:41 pm
Affiliation: MidWest Fellowship

Re: Atonement model?

Post by silentreader »

joshuabgood wrote:
silentreader wrote:
joshuabgood wrote:What is "true theology?"

Is it Piper and Mohler's reformed theology?
"confusing and exasperating," thanks for making my point.
Hi Silent Reader - not trying to be snippy here...I am just trying to hear from you what constitutes "true theology?" There are differing theological "families." I didn't mean to insult you by noting Mohler and Piper. (They are just commonly read in the moderate conservative and fundamental circles...

If you don't mind - could you explain what you meant by "true theology?"

Thanks,
I don't have a lot of time. For a start, would you agree with this definition from the ISBE?
1. Definition:
Biblical theology seems best defined as the doctrine of Biblical religion. As such it works up the material contained in the Old Testament and the New Testament as the product of exegetical study. This is the modern technical sense of the term, whereby it signifies a systematic representation of Biblical religion in its primitive form.
Biblical theology has sometimes been taken to signify not alone this science of the doctrinal declarations of the Scriptures, but the whole group of sciences Concerned with the interpretation and exposition of the Scriptures. In that wider view of Biblical theology, the term exegetical theology has been used to define and include the group of sciences already referred to. But the whole weight of preference seems, in our view, to belong to the narrower use of the term Biblical theology, as more strictly scientific.
2. Relation to Dogmatics:
This is not to confound the science of Biblical theology with that of dogmatics, for their characters are sharply distinguished. The science of dogmatics is a historico-philosophical one; that of Biblical theology is purely historic. Dogmatics declares what, for religious faith, must be regarded as truth; Biblical theology only discovers what the writers of the Old Testament and the New Testament adduce as truth. This latter merely ascertains the contents of the ideas put forward by the sacred writers, but is not concerned with their correctness or verification. It is the what of truth, in these documentary authorities, Biblical theology seeks to attain. The why, or with what right, it is so put forward as truth, belongs to the other science, that of dogmatics.
3. Place and Method of Biblical Theology:
Biblical theology is thus the more objective science; it has no need of dogmatics; dogmatics, on the other hand, cannot be without the aid of Biblical theology. The Biblical theologian should be a Christian philosopher, an exegete, and, above all, a historian. For it is in a manner purely historical that Biblical theology seeks to investigate the teaching, in whole, of each of the sacred writers. Each writing it studies in itself, in its relation to the others, and in its place in history taken as a whole. Its method is historical-genetic. The proper place of Biblical theology is at the head of historical theology, where it shines as a center of light. Its ideal as a science is to present a clear, complete and comprehensive survey of the Biblical teachings.
4. Relation to Scientific Exegesis:
In pursuance of this end, Biblical theology is served by scientific exegesis, whose results it presents in ordered form so as to exhibit the organic unity and completeness of Biblical religion. The importance of Biblical theology lies in the way it directs, corrects and fructifies all moral and dogmatic theology by bringing it to the original founts of truth. Its spirit is one of impartial historical inquiry.
One of the things that makes theology frustrating to people like HO, is that modern theology mixes in dogmatism.
0 x
Noah was a conspiracy theorist...and then it began to rain.~Unknown
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23826
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Atonement model?

Post by Josh »

I know some theologians who are not dogmatic and they are very refreshing to talk to and discuss ideas and research with.

Of course, you'll have to deal with unvarnished truth when talking to them - which often is at odds with the Protestant gospel. Sacred cows get burnt up.
0 x
Hats Off
Posts: 2532
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:42 pm
Affiliation: Plain Menno OO

Re: Atonement model?

Post by Hats Off »

Did God kill his Son? Did men kill Jesus? Did Jesus give his life? Did He commit suicide?

The thing that really matters is that man sinned and became separated from God. God could not accept sin so He offered up His Son so that those who would could be reconciled to Him again. Jesus, Son of God, present with the Father at creation, agreed to the Father's plan to bring us back to him.

So again, did God kill his only Son? Was Jesus forced to become part of this plan? Did men kill Jesus? Were men guilty because they took part in fulfilling God's plan?

What model of atonement is this? Does it matter? Simply put, Jesus, Son of God, one of the trinity, died that I might have life.
0 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23826
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Atonement model?

Post by Josh »

Hats Off,

I really like the simplicity of how you put things. It's one of the things that really helped me when I was a new believer - putting away complex theologies and just simply reading scripture without all these systems on top of it.
0 x
Post Reply