Atonement model?

Christian ethics and theology with an Anabaptist perspective
MattY
Posts: 236
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 5:36 pm
Location: Ohio
Affiliation: Beachy
Contact:

Re: Atonement model?

Post by MattY »

silentreader wrote:
lesterb wrote:
silentreader wrote:
Next question, if my death can not atone for my sin, how does substitution fit in?
It fits because the substitute was the perfect lamb of God. No amount of punishment could atone for my sin. I don't believe that Jesus was punished for my sin. Rather, he died for my sin. There is a difference.

The wages of sin are death. But only the lamb of God could atone for sin.
Lester, please don't misunderstand me, I agree with that, but my idea of substitution is that of replacing something that works with something else that works. I guess it could also mean replacing something that doesn't work with something that works. Perhaps I'm unclear on the nuances of the definition of substitution. (That's weird, almost always when I try to type substitution it comes up substation.)
I guess when I think 'Substitutionary Atonement' I think of the OT atonement lambs, which God ordained and accepted as an effective substitute until the Lamb of God came and made the final atonement.
If I may reply to this, I'm not sure what you're getting at exactly here - are you saying that you see the OT lambs as a substitute for Jesus? like, they substituted for the perfect lamb of God until He came? I have heard some people - well, one person at least - say they think of a "substitute" as something inferior, like a substitute teacher (a misunderstanding of the possible nuances of "substitution, imo), so they have problems with saying Jesus is our substitute.

Or do you see the OT sacrificial lambs as a substitute for the people of Israel - they died so the people wouldn't have to? In that case, Christ as the perfect Lamb is the final substitute. To qualify as the final substitute, one needed to be a perfect, sinless human being - which was not possible until the Incarnation of the Son himself.

Also, look at Lev. 16. The two goats symbolize Christ's atonement for sin, with the sacrificial goat symbolizing the purging of God's people from sin by Christ's own blood, while the scapegoat took away the impurities and sins of the people to the wilderness, showing how Jesus bore our sins and freed us from their guilt by taking them away. The sins of the people were placed on the head of the scapegoat by the high priest laying his hands on it and confessing Israel's sins. Together the two goats showed that they were substituted for the people and bore the penalty of sin.
0 x
Almighty, most holy God
Faithful through the ages
Almighty, most holy Lord
Glorious, almighty God
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23823
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Atonement model?

Post by Josh »

Suffice to say that when I talk to someone either well versed in Orthodox Judaism or well versed in classical Hebrew cultural and language studies, they tell me that the Christian understanding of the meaning of sacrifices and substitution is deeply flawed. Most our understanding flows from Reformation-era Western thinking on this, not from the thinking of the people who actually put these things into practice.

I would suggest getting to know people of both flavours mentioned above and listen to them when they explain what these things meant in the Old Testament.
0 x
silentreader
Posts: 2511
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 9:41 pm
Affiliation: MidWest Fellowship

Re: Atonement model?

Post by silentreader »

buckeyematt2 wrote:
silentreader wrote:
lesterb wrote: It fits because the substitute was the perfect lamb of God. No amount of punishment could atone for my sin. I don't believe that Jesus was punished for my sin. Rather, he died for my sin. There is a difference.

The wages of sin are death. But only the lamb of God could atone for sin.
Lester, please don't misunderstand me, I agree with that, but my idea of substitution is that of replacing something that works with something else that works. I guess it could also mean replacing something that doesn't work with something that works. Perhaps I'm unclear on the nuances of the definition of substitution. (That's weird, almost always when I try to type substitution it comes up substation.)
I guess when I think 'Substitutionary Atonement' I think of the OT atonement lambs, which God ordained and accepted as an effective substitute until the Lamb of God came and made the final atonement.
If I may reply to this, I'm not sure what you're getting at exactly here - are you saying that you see the OT lambs as a substitute for Jesus? like, they substituted for the perfect lamb of God until He came? I have heard some people - well, one person at least - say they think of a "substitute" as something inferior, like a substitute teacher (a misunderstanding of the possible nuances of "substitution, imo), so they have problems with saying Jesus is our substitute.

Or do you see the OT sacrificial lambs as a substitute for the people of Israel - they died so the people wouldn't have to? In that case, Christ as the perfect Lamb is the final substitute. To qualify as the final substitute, one needed to be a perfect, sinless human being - which was not possible until the Incarnation of the Son himself.

Also, look at Lev. 16. The two goats symbolize Christ's atonement for sin, with the sacrificial goat symbolizing the purging of God's people from sin by Christ's own blood, while the scapegoat took away the impurities and sins of the people to the wilderness, showing how Jesus bore our sins and freed us from their guilt by taking them away. The sins of the people were placed on the head of the scapegoat by the high priest laying his hands on it and confessing Israel's sins. Together the two goats showed that they were substituted for the people and bore the penalty of sin.
What I meant was that the OT atonement sacrificial lambs, and the 2 goats you mentioned would be similar, were a substitute, stopgap measure, what would be the proper term? A temporary fix that God commanded until the Lamb of God fulfilled(?) and completed(?) the Atonement fully.
0 x
Noah was a conspiracy theorist...and then it began to rain.~Unknown
silentreader
Posts: 2511
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 9:41 pm
Affiliation: MidWest Fellowship

Re: Atonement model?

Post by silentreader »

Josh wrote:Suffice to say that when I talk to someone either well versed in Orthodox Judaism or well versed in classical Hebrew cultural and language studies, they tell me that the Christian understanding of the meaning of sacrifices and substitution is deeply flawed. Most our understanding flows from Reformation-era Western thinking on this, not from the thinking of the people who actually put these things into practice.

I would suggest getting to know people of both flavours mentioned above and listen to them when they explain what these things meant in the Old Testament.
And if they have not accepted Jesus as Messiah, then who is it that does not understand?
0 x
Noah was a conspiracy theorist...and then it began to rain.~Unknown
Hats Off
Posts: 2532
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:42 pm
Affiliation: Plain Menno OO

Re: Atonement model?

Post by Hats Off »

I think we would be taught that the sacrifices of goats and bulls could never take away the sins of the people. The sacrifices were signs and symbols or types and figures pointing to the perfect Lamb, the one that could and did atone for the sins of mankind.
0 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23823
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Atonement model?

Post by Josh »

silentreader wrote:
Josh wrote:Suffice to say that when I talk to someone either well versed in Orthodox Judaism or well versed in classical Hebrew cultural and language studies, they tell me that the Christian understanding of the meaning of sacrifices and substitution is deeply flawed. Most our understanding flows from Reformation-era Western thinking on this, not from the thinking of the people who actually put these things into practice.

I would suggest getting to know people of both flavours mentioned above and listen to them when they explain what these things meant in the Old Testament.
And if they have not accepted Jesus as Messiah, then who is it that does not understand?
They understand exactly what the Old Testament was talking about and what was even meant by terms like "salvation" and "Passover lamb".

I think the Old Testament is important, and I think it needs to be understood in its cultural and contemporary context, especially if we are going to build complex theologies on top of it.
0 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23823
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Atonement model?

Post by Josh »

Hats Off wrote:I think we would be taught that the sacrifices of goats and bulls could never take away the sins of the people. The sacrifices were signs and symbols or types and figures pointing to the perfect Lamb, the one that could and did atone for the sins of mankind.
Indeed. Everything in the Old Testament points to the New, including God's heart to to show mercy to people and to save them, and his longing for people to follow him.
0 x
MattY
Posts: 236
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 5:36 pm
Location: Ohio
Affiliation: Beachy
Contact:

Re: Atonement model?

Post by MattY »

Josh wrote:
silentreader wrote:
Josh wrote:Suffice to say that when I talk to someone either well versed in Orthodox Judaism or well versed in classical Hebrew cultural and language studies, they tell me that the Christian understanding of the meaning of sacrifices and substitution is deeply flawed. Most our understanding flows from Reformation-era Western thinking on this, not from the thinking of the people who actually put these things into practice.

I would suggest getting to know people of both flavours mentioned above and listen to them when they explain what these things meant in the Old Testament.
And if they have not accepted Jesus as Messiah, then who is it that does not understand?
They understand exactly what the Old Testament was talking about and what was even meant by terms like "salvation" and "Passover lamb".

I think the Old Testament is important, and I think it needs to be understood in its cultural and contemporary context, especially if we are going to build complex theologies on top of it.
Hmmm. I agree the historical and cultural setting should be taken into account, and I think the OT is important. But does that mean Jews understand "exactly" what it signifies? Do they understand Isaiah 53? What about the messianic psalms?

If they don't accept Jesus as the Messiah, I doubt they understand the parts of the OT that point to Him - not only because they lack the illumination of the Spirit (1 Cor. 2), but because they have motivation to interpret it differently in order to rebut Christianity.
0 x
Almighty, most holy God
Faithful through the ages
Almighty, most holy Lord
Glorious, almighty God
MattY
Posts: 236
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 5:36 pm
Location: Ohio
Affiliation: Beachy
Contact:

Re: Atonement model?

Post by MattY »

Hats Off wrote:I think we would be taught that the sacrifices of goats and bulls could never take away the sins of the people. The sacrifices were signs and symbols or types and figures pointing to the perfect Lamb, the one that could and did atone for the sins of mankind.
Agreed.
0 x
Almighty, most holy God
Faithful through the ages
Almighty, most holy Lord
Glorious, almighty God
KingdomBuilder
Posts: 1482
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 9:00 pm
Affiliation: church of Christ

Re: Atonement model?

Post by KingdomBuilder »

I've been quite satisfied with the Christus Victor view. Coming upon it helped me a good deal. I think it promotes a much healthier view of atonement that holds consistent with the character of God.

I haven't read all of the views mentioned here. But I'm curious, which highlights the obedience of Christ to the Father as integral? This has been something that jumps out at me in the scripture.
0 x
Ponder anew what the Almighty can do
Post Reply