Thoughts on the Atonement

[joshuabgood]

Neto, I like your emphasis on reconciliation in atonement. It may lack a punchy proof text from Romans, but it does organize the whole of scripture into a coherent theme with the restoration of the garden in Revelation and the fellowship that entails.

Oh but there is a punchy proof text from Romans 5...

6 For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— 8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. 10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. 11 More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

[barnhart]

Neto, I like your emphasis on reconciliation in atonement. It may lack a punchy proof text from Romans, but it does organize the whole of scripture into a coherent theme with the restoration of the garden in Revelation and the fellowship that entails.

Oh but there is a punchy proof text from Romans 5...

6 For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— 8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. 10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. 11 More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

Well, I guess that settles it.

[joshuabgood]

Neto, I like your emphasis on reconciliation in atonement. It may lack a punchy proof text from Romans, but it does organize the whole of scripture into a coherent theme with the restoration of the garden in Revelation and the fellowship that entails.

Oh but there is a punchy proof text from Romans 5...

6 For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— 8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. 10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. 11 More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

Well, I guess that settles it.

That's right. And also don't forget this one from 2 Corinthians 5

16 From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer. 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation.[a] The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. 18 All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. 20 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. 21

I rest my case...=)

[Bootstrap]

Neto, I like your emphasis on reconciliation in atonement. It may lack a punchy proof text from Romans, but it does organize the whole of scripture into a coherent theme with the restoration of the garden in Revelation and the fellowship that entails.

Oh but there is a punchy proof text from Romans 5...

6 For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— 8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. 10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. 11 More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

Amen. This really is the Gospel that ties it all together. And there's another punchy proof text in 2 Corinthians 5:16-18:

16 From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer. 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. 18 All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. 20 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. 21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

We have been given the ministry of reconciliation. That's also part of the deal. If we aren't trying to bring others to reconciliation with God, we're missing a big part of our calling.

[HondurasKeiser]

Neto, I like this thread as I've been thinking about atonement lately as well. I've lately wondered at another 'Why' question - why are we indebted or in what way? I understand being in bondage to sin - I'm less clear on how sin actually makes us indebted to God and how blood sacrifices atone for that.

[barnhart]

Neto, I like this thread as I've been thinking about atonement lately as well. I've lately wondered at another 'Why' question - why are we indebted or in what way? I understand being in bondage to sin - I'm less clear on how sin actually makes us indebted to God and how blood sacrifices atone for that.

I'll take a wild swing at this.

In Genesis 15 God makes a curious covenant with Abraham and his descendants (including descendants by faith) where the bodies of animals are cut in two and the two parties pass between the pieces. It is generally thought this symbolizes the commitment that should either party default, they will by rights be treated as the sacrifice. Jeremiah 34 records a similar ceremony and is clearer on the details. The indebtedness of sin is proof we are covenant breakers and deserve this fate. In Genesis 15 God passed through in the form of a image of light but Abraham is not asked to follow, foreshadowing God's willingness to restore fellowship at personal cost. Perhaps the blood sacrificial system is a visible foreshadowing of the blood of the perfect lamb of God.

[Neto]

Neto, I like this thread as I've been thinking about atonement lately as well. I've lately wondered at another 'Why' question - why are we indebted or in what way? I understand being in bondage to sin - I'm less clear on how sin actually makes us indebted to God and how blood sacrifices atone for that.

HK, I'm inclined to think that these words like "debt", "owe", "ransom", "redeem", and probably others are symbolic in that there isn't a person or entity to which this "debt" is "owed". (The well-known chorus comes to mind: "I owed a debt I could not pay, He paid a debt He did not owe,". But they don't bother to say to whom they think this debt is owed.) Unless the "debtee" is death.

But to your question, my best answer (probably the 'standard' one) is that we inherited the sin nature from our ancestor, Adam. ("By one man sin came into the world, ... and the 'many' died by the sin of one man.") But I hesitate, because that passage goes on to say that "how much more by one Man the grace of God was abundant to the 'many'." One might expect it to say "to all" in the case of the effect of Adam's sin, and "to many" in the case of the effect of Jesus' righteous life, death, and resurrection. But the words are the same. So I tend to believe that this passage (Romans 5) is speaking specifically to what theologians call 'original sin'. So what I gather from this is that no one will go to hell because of Adam's sin - 'original sin'. This is covered equally by Jesus' life, death, & resurrection as the effect of Adam's sin extended. I think that since no one is perfect (except Jesus), but for our salvation by grace through faith, we each are already condemned, and rightfully so, because we are all guilty.

However, I'm not at all sure that this in any way answers your question. But IF the 'debt' is owed to 'death' in that the result of sin is death, then Jesus' victory over death nullifies the 'debt' - assuming that we respond correctly to God's words to "Hear and obey", placing us "under the blood of Jesus". The theories that say that God needed to buy us back from the Satan make very little sense to me.

All of this is interesting to explore, but I DO really think that the tendency of Western theology to focus on the HOW, really diverts our attention from the important fact that God confronts the evil in our lives in order to regain the lost relationship, and that He deeply desires this because he LOVES us. (There are many examples of this in the OT history and prophecies. I think that this shows us at least in part the meaning of the statement that "Jesus was sacrificed from the foundation of the world". There isn't one OT salvation, and then a different one for after Jesus' life, death, & resurrection. The level of understanding of it is certainly different from the human point of view, but I don't think God looks at it differently.

I've said a fair bit about Jesus' victory over death here. But I also think that we should see how he had victory over sin. Most theologians (all?) shrink back from the suggestion that Jesus had "a sin nature". They think that this would automatically mean that he had sinned. But we can beat ourselves up all day long (all our lives) over the fact that we are tempted (and this is the most 'visible' proof that we have that sin nature), but that doesn’t mean that we have sinned (in those times when we are tempted). But our tendency is to assume that Jesus’ didn’t have one – couldn’t have. But what if he did, and had complete victory over it? What if He was tempted in the same ways as we are, and yet never sinned? OOPS, the Bible actually says that He was tempted in every way as we are. It also tells us that He suffered in being tempted. It isn’t just his last week that forms the atonement; his whole life was one of sacrifice and suffering. If we resist the sin nature, as Jesus did, then in our willingness and determination to obey him we are suffering for him, which doesn’t go unnoticed. (I changed the last part of this last sentence. I had originally written “… then in our willingness and determination to obey him we are suffering in the same way as he.” But there is of course a major difference – his suffering was unwarranted, and ours is deserved. His suffering had an effect on “the many”, and ours is mostly confined to nothing more than obedience. I don’t really know how to say this well.)

EDIT: When I went to post this I got the alert that someone had posted between the time I had started writing something and when I actually hit 'Submit'. Actually, I had started my response, then received a business telephone call that took nearly a half an hour, Then I had to figure out where I had been going with this, and try to pick up my thoughts again. Needless to say, my memory doesn't always serve me well, so I hope that this all sounds reasonably coherent and connected.

[PetrChelcicky]

I still propose that the debtee intended was neither God nor devil nor death but our neighbour. This would best match with the meaning of "debt".
If you doubt that our neighbour would be worth it, remember that the Jesus movement coined the phrase: If you call your brother a fool, you deserve capital punishment.
In any case I think we must concentrate on the Jesus movement and its gradual evolving of its ideas. It seems that the Lord's Prayer came first, the glooming prophecy that the Son of God will need to die "for our sins" somewhat afterwards, and Paul is some steps farther.