Atonement Praxis
Recently there has been a bit of a buzz around the blogosphere concerning the ‘Atonement’, I have even posted a few things on this very subject. And in doing some research on it I have come across certain theories called the “Eucharistic praxis” and the “Atonement Imagery”.
As I understand it, “Atonement Imagery” is not so much about the suffering of the Son but more about understanding the passion and injustice done to a man. It becomes less about the divinity of Christ, as they often refer to that as a mythical story – and more about the historical man Jesus. To understand the crucifixion primarily in this way you may fail to see the whole of Jesus, the God/man.
If the atonement is brought down to the level of praxis and community only, then the divinity of Christ could very well be lost. As a result, the injustice of the cross against a man is exalted above the Penal Substitution act and this is because the emphasis is the man being punished by God the so called ‘child abuser’. If the divinity of Him is neglected, this could ultimately result in an unbalance in the understanding of the triune nature of God because man is amplified.
Because of this — [h]e that being Jesus and the work of the cross (not the capitalised [H]e) — encourages us to be co-creative (popular in the feminized theory. An Examination of the Problems of Inclusive Language in the Trinitarian …By Thomas J. Scirghi) in the struggle against the social injustice of this sacrifice that was meted out on someone who did not actually deserve it. More importantly, once you start reducing the atonement to mean ‘atone-man-ment’, you may fail to understand the gravity of mankind’s sin and the part we all have played in the crucifixion. You cannot begin to address the first things; that being the problem of sin, by using a “Community Atonement Praxis” alone. Rather, you should start at the point of ‘in the beginning God’ and try to grasp — as much as the fallible mind can — the Holiness and Righteousness of God and that mankind clearly falls short of His image. That imagery is the starting point for vertical reconciliation between man and his maker. “Atonement Imagery/Praxis” seems to be the horizontal reconciliation of the community; reconciliation between mankind.
I have just finished reading something from Scott McKnight’s blog (Jesus Creed) he has written a book called “A community called Atonement” he says this…
Not to let the cat out of the bag, but one point (that explains the title) is that Atonement is God’s work for us but it is also “praxis.”
I am reminded of the following…
In recent times some have thought that reconciliation ought to be seen in what we may term a horizontal rather than a vertical direction. Sin is thought of as something that erects barriers between a man and his neighbour, rather than between a man and his God. Reconciliation then becomes a way of enabling men to live together in meaningful community. there is , of course, something in this, for the man who has felt the healing touch of Christ upon his life is concerned with breaking down barriers which divide men.
But there must be a right order here. First comes reconciliation of the sinner with God, then reconciliation with man follows. Ephesians 2 is instructive in this connection. There, in connection with the great division of men into Jews and Gentiles, it is pointed out that Gentiles were separated from Christ as well as from one another. But the blood of Christ that brought them near to God brought them also near to one another. Peace was made between man and man, but it was the consequence of peace between man and God. (J. Denney, The Christian Doctrine of Reconciliation 191
Of first things — the reconciliation should happen between the sinner and God! This is very important. The question is this…if your emphasis is on the ‘community atonement praxis’, then some may come away without being reconciled with God thinking all along that they are in good stead with the Almighty because they are co-creating a better community for everyone, not only believers. This quickly becomes a social, humanitarian understanding of the ‘atonement’.
We constantly read that the “Atonement” however you understand it, goes hand in hand with the gospel. This is very true. So, having the right view is very important. The gospel should be about man’s condition without God and how it is possible to get right with God through His Son that has provided the only way to be restored to any kind of relationship with the Father.
Dr. Gary Gilley puts it well when he says…
It does not seem to be an option to the emergent church that both social injustices and eternal redemption can be and have been attended to by God’s people. But, despite opinions to the contrary, the priority of Scripture is on man’s relationship to God. It is because men are alienated from God that they mistreat one another. The spiritually redeemed and transformed person should and will care about social sins.
But, again, the gospel is about man’s alienation from God and what He has done through Christ to reconcile us to Himself (Romans 5:6-11), not about the ozone layer and elimination of poverty. Neither Jesus nor the apostles made these latter things the focus of their ministries; it was the reconciliation of souls to God that was at the heart of their message. Once we begin to draw our gospel from the culture, no matter what culture that might be, we have altered the true gospel. Emergent leaders are not wrong to be concerned about the environment and social injustice; they are wrong to confuse it with the gospel of Jesus Christ. Dr Gary Gilley
One more thing as I hash this out. I thought I would research a Midrashic understanding of “Atonement” and I found this…
Moses and Atonement
Another example of the need for atonement is found in the story of Moses and the Golden Calf. After Israel sinned by making the golden calf, Moses ascended Mount Sinai to interceding for them. God was ready to destroy Israel; He was unwilling to even let His presence be among them. He said, “I will send an angel with Israel, but I cannot go with you or I might break out against you and destroy you.” (Exodus 33)
Because of the sin of the calf, Israel found herself unprotected. She has no covering. She is in danger from the presence of God.
But Moses says to Israel, “Perhaps I can make atonement for your sin.” (Exodus 32:30). He fasts for forty days and nights, and then goes back up the mountain with the two new tablets. The two tablets are meant to replace the ones he broke when he saw the calf. He goes back up the mountain, back up into the presence of God.
On the mountain Moses implores God for mercy and requests to be shown all of God’s glory. Face to face. God replies that no man can see his face and live. Moses would be consumed by God’s glory. Instead God offers to cover Moses with his hand, hiding him in the cleft of the rock, while God passes by and declares the full meaning of His Name. He offers to tell Moses exactly who he is. He offers to reveal to Moses his essential person.
“And he passed in front of Moses, proclaiming, ‘The L-RD, the L-RD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation.’” (Exodus 34:5-7)
This revelation is called the Thirteen Attributes of God. For the first time in history, the full extent of God’s mercy and grace were revealed. Moses already knew God was gracious, he already knew he was abounding in loving kindness, but to what extent he did not know, until that moment when God covered him with his hand and proclaimed his Name. Only then, with the revelation of these Thirteen Attributes, was it made clear that the essential essence of God and the meaning of his Name, the L-RD is Grace.
The Thirteen Attributes are an oft-repeated refrain in the prayers of the Day of Atonement. In those prayers, the congregation readily admits that we have no worthy deeds, we have nothing to show God, we have no merit to tip the scales of judgment in our favor. We have no basis to ask for mercy except for this, “You are the L-RD, the L-RD, gracious and compassionate:
The Second Coming of Moses
In the narrative, it is only after God has revealed to Moses his Thirteen Attributes,that he makes a new covenant with Israel.
He makes a new covenant with Israel and Moses returns down the mountain with the tablets. When the people see Moses, his face is radiating brilliance from being in the presence of God. Moses achieved covering for Israel’s sin. According to midrash, the day Moses came down Sinai with the 2nd set of tablets was indeed the Day of Atonement.
The picture of Moses in his second coming is startlingly messianic. On Moses’ first trip down the mountain out of the presence of God, the tablets were broken. Like Messiah himself, the Word was broken for the sin of the people. After this initial descent down the mountain, Moses returned to the God. He went back into the very presence of God to make atonement, to effect a new covenant, to reveal the true and essential person of God. He was able to reveal the full extent of God’s mercy and grace. These things accomplished, he then returned, bearing the New Covenant in his arms. He came down from the Father in splendor, in glory, in brilliance, terrible to behold. It was the Day of Atonement.
There is much more on this subject.
I personally find that the Hebraic, Midrashic understanding of the “Atonement” to be a much more biblically based understanding coupled with a considerable amount of deeper imagery than what is being discussed in current postmodern circles.
Here is another great link called “Yom Kippur – the Day of Atonement“
Related Post
