Atonement attacked - Brian McLaren
The best advice anyone gave me was if there be any teaching, Christian or otherwise, that diminishes the “work of the cross” and the need for blood atonement that teaching is straight from the pits of Hell. The work of the cross is our propitiation to appease of God because of our sin.
The bible is a Jewish book and we must understand the atonement within Jewish thought.
Jesus was pierced for our transgressions and anyone who does not understand this has not had their conscience convicted by the Holy Spirit.
Why does this matter??? Read “Does Brian McLaren Have a Generous View of Hell?”
Jesusanity - What is that?
Those who visit this blog are probably aware that I have previously posted much about the Atonement and the implications of how one understands it. This issue is very important to the Church, it always has been and it always will be. Well, at least it should be. Anyway, I came across a post written by Albert Mohler called ‘Christianity vs. Jesusanity — The Postmodern Temptation‘. In that post he speaks about the postmodern (ugghhh, soooo sick of that word!!!!) attempt to humanise Jesus.
Of this is writes…
While postmodern literary theorists debate the meaning of “totalizing metanarratives,” at the level of popular piety we see the widespread substitution of “spirituality” for biblical Christianity.
This is exactly what we are seeing! The following quote is from authors Darrell L. Bock and Daniel B. Wallace who argue that popular culture is on a quest “to unseat the biblical Christ”. In a book called ‘Dethroning Jesus‘ the authors recognise that there is an ongoing attempt to reduce Jesus into a dethroned humanitarian teacher…
“Jesusanity” is a coined term for the alternative story about Jesus. Here the center of the story is still Jesus, but Jesus as either a prophet or a teacher of religious wisdom. In Jesusanity, Jesus remains very much Jesus of Nazareth. He points the way to God and leads people into a journey with God. His role is primarily one of teacher, guide, and example. Jesus’ special status involves his insight into the human condition and the enlightenment he brings to it. There is no enthronement of Jesus at God’s side, only the power of his teaching and example. In this story, the key is that Jesus inspires others, but there is no throne for him. He is one among many – the best, perhaps, and one worthy to learn from and follow.
Check out the post by Albert Mohler and see what you think. I for one am glad that there are some authors willing to lay it all out and stick to good clear biblical exegesis!
Previous posts on Blood Atonement.
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
It’s all about the Atonement, again!
Carla over at ‘More Books and Things‘ has been doing an excellent job at reviewing the book ‘Stricken by God’ by Brad Jersak. She is doing this chapter by chapter.
With Mr. Jersak calling us to unite and follow Christ, the first question we should ask ourselves is… who is Christ and what was His purpose…
“With significant breadth and depth of perspective, our authors unite now in inviting the reader to follow Christ into that same victory” (of the resurrection)
-Jersak, page 53, SBG
We should all be very wary that there will be those who will preach another Jesus in the last days and because of this you will have to judge which Jesus it is that you are going to follow. Is it the one that is found in the Word of God, the one who is the Word of God in the flesh? Or is it the one that has become nothing more than a political leader fighting against the religious and political domination of his time. [Please note the small 'h' is used deliberately by these new age teachers. Concerning the dual nature of Christ, the deity of Christ is reduced as the man Jesus is being exalted, more about these doctrinal complications in a future post]
2Co 11:2-4 I am jealous of you with God’s own jealousy, because I promised you in marriage to one husband, to present you as a pure virgin to Christ. However, I am afraid that just as the serpent deceived Eve by its tricks, so your minds may somehow be lured away from sincere and pure devotion to Christ. For if someone comes along and preaches another Jesus than the one we preached, or should you receive a different spirit from the one you received or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you are all too willing to listen.
This new Jesus, the man, has become nothing more than a political leader fighting against the religious and political domination of his time…
“following Jesus, is not about believing a correct atonement theology” …but a “commitment to the path of confrontation with dominations systems”
“The way of the cross is about discipleship, not believing in the blood of Jesus as a substitute for our own. I think it’s bad history because it presumes that Jesus’s death was part of the plan of God.” (p. 158, SBG)
Like the above scripture says, we are set aside for one husband… Jersak and his ilk are temple whores in the kingdom of God! I am beginning to understand the increasing relevance of the following scripture when Jesus spoke about the Kingdom of God being like a fish net which needs sorting out. The good fish are kept the other bad ones will be thrown into a blazing furnace, a place where there is gnashing of teeth… Hades, Hell, you know that other not so popular place that certain teachers say doesn’t even exist (Emergents like Doug Pagitt)
Mat 13:47-50 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a large net thrown into the sea that gathered all kinds of fish. When it was full, the fishermen hauled it ashore. Then they sat down, sorted the good fish into containers, and threw the bad ones away. That is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will go out and separate the evil from the righteous and will throw them into a blazing furnace. In that place there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.”
‘Stricken by God’ is all about the ‘Atonement’ and how to understand it properly according to this new way of teaching.
Any false teaching…teachings straight from the pits of hell, whoops can I say that???…will not preach the biblical understanding of the ‘Atonement’ and/or the resurrection. Of course it wouldn’t. Why? Because, if you had even a cursory understanding of this you may be convicted of sin and find out that you need to be born again of Spirit to enter heaven…Oh, silly me I can’t say that either. Satan would not be too pleased about someone becoming born again now would he? Wait a minute…I can’t say that there is a Satan either… can I?
No sin, no problemo. This is the kind of teaching that will lead people straight into that ‘place of which we do not speak’.
Seeker Friendly -The Ooops Factor - and the Headless Bride.
A bit of a mishmash post for you today…
Seems that the seeker friendly program is being questioned by its own leaders. Why? Because those who have been ministered to in this seeker friendly way are not growing up or maturing. Bill Hybels from Willow Creek says…
Some of the stuff that we have put millions of dollars into thinking it would really help our people grow and develop spiritually, when the data actually came back it wasn’t helping people that much. Other things that we didn’t put that much money into and didn’t put much staff against is stuff our people are crying out for.
And he goes on to say…
We made a mistake. What we should have done when people crossed the line of faith and become Christians, we should have started telling people and teaching people that they have to take responsibility to become ‘self feeders.’ We should have gotten people, taught people, how to read their bible between services, how to do the spiritual practices much more aggressively on their own.
But have they really learnt from their mistake? Consider the following statement from Greg Hawkins from Willow Creek…
Our dream is that we fundamentally change the way we do church. That we take out a clean sheet of paper and we rethink all of our old assumptions. Replace it with new insights. Insights that are informed by research and rooted in Scripture. Our dream is really to discover what God is doing and how he’s asking us to transform this planet.
As Bob Burney points out…
Isn’t that what we were told when this whole seeker-sensitive thing started? The church growth gurus again want to throw away their old assumptions and “take out a clean sheet of paper” and, presumably, come up with a new paradigm for ministry. Please note that “rooted in Scripture” still follows “rethink,” “new insights” and “informed research.” Someone still doesn’t get it. Unless there is a return to simple biblical (and relevant) principles, a new faulty scheme will replace the existing one and another generation will follow along as the latest piper plays.
Well, I guess we will wait and see what the new insights will be, and if they are biblical or not.But just before I go. I quickly read some of the comments to the above article and one commenter replied by saying…
Has anyone ever said, “hey let’s see what the Bible says about growth and the gatherings?” And God added to them those who would be saved! You see the church back then were all in agreement and connected to Christ as the head,
And this got me thinking about something I read just yesterday from the ‘Extreme Prophetic’ website where a prophecy was given for this year and it talks about the headless bride (yeah, you read me right, the headless bride)…
This is the year for the Ecclesia – the true shining headless bride of Christ to come into alignment with His headship and authority.
Seriously, I really have a vivid imagination and when I read that, I immediately thought of the ‘Bride of Frankenstein‘. It scared me to even consider that the Bride of Christ has gone around headless for the last 2000 years.Perhaps they are not so far from the truth when you consider that these New Apostolic Reformers are speaking about encounters with the Watchers (Angels) and these encounters help to open up portals or gateways into the heavenlies and that these Watcher’s are wanting to ‘partner’ with them (the link I provided goes to a video). It is Ryan Wyatt from ‘Extreme Prophetic’ website talking about the watchers, the heavenlies and portals and other supernatural things…Errr, does this partnering sound a little too much like the Days of Noah to you! If you don’t know much about the Watchers the Book of Enoch writes extensively about them, it is an outside-biblical book. I have researched a little about the Watchers before here and here.I mean, perhaps their bride really doesn’t have a head yet, or perhaps this bride has been cut off by the Sword of Truth and is left floundering around in the dark because they are pretty much waiting for the watchers to partner with them and open the portal of heavenly light.Look I could go on, but for now I will leave it. All of this stuff, the seeker friendly and the obscure mystic New-Age Occultic move of a wannabe try hard god personally effects me, big time.
Violent Act or an Example of sacrifice? Penal Substitutionary Atonement under attack!
I have just been emailed something written by Roger Oakland about the Emerging Church and their view on the ‘Blood Atonement of Christ’. I thought I would share it for you as it speaks about the movers and shakers of those within this movement and how they have come to re-understand the cross of Christ.
Roger Oakland says this about the ‘Blood Atonement’…
The heart and core of the Christian faith is the gospel of Jesus Christ according to the Scriptures. This foundational belief is under attack by many who are considered to be leaders of the Emerging Church movement that is sweeping the world and “re-inventing” Christianity.
The heart and core of the Christian faith is based upon Jesus Christ’s shed blood at Calvary as the only acceptable substitutionary atonement for mankind’s sins. The Gospel message requires this foundation. The Bible says the wages of sin is death—thus every person alive should receive the penalty of spiritual death because none of us is without sin, since we are born with our sin nature intact. Satan hates the Gospel message. He understands what the Gospel means, and his agenda is to deceive mankind from understanding and believing so they can suffer eternally with him.
The new way of thinking about the ‘Penal Substitutionary Atonement’ stands in stark contrast to what the bible explicitly tell us about the work of Christ and His sacrifice on the cross.
When you read the following from teachers who are considered to be masters at higher cristicism…
The Church’s fixation on the death of Jesus as the universal saving act must end, and the place of the cross must be reimagined in Christian faith. Why? Because of the cult of suffering and the vindictive God behind it. Alan Jones, Reimagining Christianity (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley and Sons, 2005), p. 132.
And this from Alan Jones…
The other thread of just criticism addresses the suggestion implicit in the cross that Jesus’ sacrifice was to appease an angry God. Penal substitution [the Cross] was the name of this vile doctrine.
You gotta ask yourself… why are they re-wording the Word…
I let go of the notion that the Bible is a divine product. I learned that it is a human cultural product, the product of two ancient communities, biblical Israel and early Christianity. As such, it contained their understandings and affirmations, not statements coming directly or somewhat directly from God.… I realized that whatever “divine revelation” and the “inspiration of the Bible” meant (if they meant anything), they did not mean that the Bible was a divine product with divine authority. Marcus Borg The God We Never Knew (New York, NY: HarperCollins, First HarperCollins Paperback Edition, 1998), p. 25.
These movers and shakers say that there is one main bunch of people who are the BIGGEST PROBLEM for them being able to move forward into Ecumenical Unity. In their own words, it is the fundies who are the ones that are the divisive ones, fundies just can’t get over the substitutionary atonement…
Were you to talk to that fundamentalist preacher, he doubtless would insist that you must believe in the “substitutionary” theory of atonement—namely, that Jesus suffered as a substitute for us the punishment due us for our sins. But can you imagine a modern courtroom in a civilized country where an innocent man would be deliberately punished for another man’s crime? … Substitutionary atonement … came a long way down in history in many a penal system. But now it is a precivilized barbarity; no secular court would tolerate the idea for a moment; only in certain belated theologies is it retained as an explanation of our Lord’s death … Christ’s sacrificial life and death are too sacred to be so misrepresented.. Harry Emerson Fosdick, Dear Mr. Brown, op. cit., p. 136.
Funny thing to think that God’s court should even be considered to be a secular one anyway, what’s with that??? I was under the impression that it would be a theocratic one, one ruled by Christ Himself when He comes again! Secular, I think NOT!!!
Related Posts
