 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > The Atonement Debate | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
archive
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 516
| Posted 6/28/2001 12:44 PM (GMT -6) |   |
jarkat
04/17/01 1:53 PM
The Atonement Debate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is just a question over the Christus Victor and Penal Substitution views of Atonement. In Evangelical Options, it reads "the Bible describes Jesus' death as a "ransom" and salvation as "redemption." Both terms refer to the price that had to be paid to release one from slavery. Both metaphors communicate the truth that Jesus did all that was necessary to get us out from under the bondage to Satan, sin and condemnation." Isn't this the same as the Penal Substitution view that "Jesus died in our place?" Didn't he die in order that we could be free from eternity in hell (from "bondage to Satan, sin and condemnation")? They seem a lot more similar to me than the articles appear to display- any ideas?
Kathryn
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
GregBoyd
04/17/01 2:04 PM
RE: The Atonement Debate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clarifying Note from the Doc: In my 2 Theology Classes at Bethel College, Students are reading a rough draft of a book I have co-authored with Dr. Paul Eddy entitled Evangelical Options. I have encouraged them to get on-line with questions and comments and arguments that arise from their readings.
Students, I encourage you to follow Kathrine's example and join in the discussion. I encourage others to join in as they so desire -- but if you're not in the class, I can't give you any course credit for doing so. Sorry.
Doc
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
swekat
04/23/01 5:50 PM
RE: The Atonement Debate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree with what you said Kathryn. They seem to go together. I was thinking that if they are seperate they limit God. I see them as going hand in hand.
Katrina
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
ghost-dog-girl
04/23/01 6:29 PM
RE: The Atonement Debate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Welcome to the two Kats.
Here's how I distinguish between the Penal Substition and the Christus Victor views of the atonement.
What is the primary problem each view solves?
1) In Penal Substitution, the problem is that God has to take out his wrath over sin on someone, so he ends up taking it out on Jesus instead of us, even though we are the ones who really deserve it. Theologically this is weird (because Jesus is God). And since Christ's death satisfies God's wrath, then what's the point of the resurrection?
2) In Christus Victor, the problem is that we are in self-chosen bondage to sin and slavery to Satan's kingdom and we cannot escape in our own power even if we tried, so Jesus kicks Satan's butt (via the resurrection) and set us free to live a Godly life through him (since he lived a sinless life and died an innocent death).
In 1, Jesus substitutes for us so we are not destroyed by God's wrath which is what we really deserve; in 2, Jesus saves us from our sin and slavery to Satan. No model of the atonement is adequate in itself, but I think it is more helpful to conceptualize Christ as savior rather than substitute.
Blessings,
GDG
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Triskal
04/23/01 9:07 PM
RE: RE: The Atonement Debate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've always agreed with the first one. Mainly because the Bible says that Jesus "became sin" and that God poured out his wrath upon Jesus. This is why Jesus was so stressed in the garden, not because he was worried about the pain of death, but because he knew that God would need to pour his wrath out on Jesus. This answers the question of what Jesus meant when he said "if it is possible, let this cup pass from me." He was referring to the pouring out of God's wrath on him. A cup often referred to God's wrath being poured out. There are several passages in the Old Testament that say Israel drank the cup of God's wrath. The first view also answers the question of what Jesus meant when he said "God, why have you forsaken me?" while dying on the cross. God literally had to turn his face away from Jesus because of the great wrath that was being poured upon him. This view is talked about much in the recent book "The murder of Jesus" by John MacArthur. He lists several passages in the Bible that indicate the first view to be the more accurate of the two. Jesus "became sin" and suffered the wrath of it. The need for the resurrection is to bring new life to those in bondage. It's not enough to just crucify the flesh, but the spirit needs to become alive. If there was no resurrection, then Jesus would still be dead, and spiritually so would we.
In His Grip,
Matt
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Mr_Squirrel
04/23/01 10:57 PM
RE: The Atonement Debate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why isn't there a view that combines Penal Substitution and Christus Vicor? By themselves, each are as said above, inadaquate.
Just wondering...
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
ghost-dog-girl
04/24/01 8:36 AM
Did God murder Jesus?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So far in this thread we have a couple kats, a ghost-dog, and we have recently been joined by Mr. Squirrel. Does anyone else feel like they're in an enchanted forest?
I agree with Mr. Squirrel that neither the Penal Substitution nor the Christus Victor views are adequate in themselves, but I'm still going to argue that the Christus Victor view is more helpful, and more consistent with the character of God.
Matt cites a book called, "The murder of Jesus," which seems to argue for the Penal Substitution view. Here are a few thoughts in response:
1) I don't think that the cup metphor can be limited to an association with wrath in Scripture. For example, in Psalm 23 it is used in the context of overwhelming blessing (cf. v. 5, "my cup runneth over") and in the Lord's Supper it symbolizes the New Covenant.
2) Did God murder Jesus (as in the Penal Substitution view) or did sinful humans? Consider the following verses:
"This Jesus GOD RAISED UP...Therefore let the entire house of Israel know with certainty that God has made him both Lord and Messiah, this Jesus whom YOU CRUCIFIED." Acts 2:32, 26
"The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the God of our ancestors has glorified his servant Jesus, whom YOU HANDED OVER AND REJECTED in the presence of Pilate, though he had decided to release him. But YOU REJECTED the Holy and Righteous One and asked to have a murderer given to you, and YOU KILLED the Author of life, whom GOD RAISED from the dead." Acts 3:13-15
"let it be known to all of you...that this man is standing before you in good health by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom YOU CRUCIFIED, whom GOD RAISED from the dead." Acts 4:10
Later, GDG
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
RevivalTheology
04/24/01 10:05 AM
RE: RE: The Atonement Debate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't really have time to engage in this, but would like to throw out that there are many more biblical options for speaking about the Atonement than just the two mentioned.
As for combining options, I would recommend an article by Kenneth Grider that you may find here.
In the Lamb
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
jarkat
04/25/01 1:34 PM
RE: RE: RE: The Atonement Debate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the link to a government view of Atonement. It seems very clost to the Moral Government view, the third view we've discussed in our theology class. I briefly skimmed over the article, but one thing that appeared different to the moral government view was that the moral gov't view claims Jesus did not need to die for God to forgive us. Rather, He forgives us freely and "Jesus played the role of a sin offering." This view believes God forives us as long as we repent, that there is no reason to have to suffer for sins, which I think, if I am interpreting this view correctly, is why Christ didn't become sin, or die in our place, as the Penal Substitution and Christus Victor views hold. Any other insight? Overall, I completely agree that this debate is not necessarily clear cut, and I find my self agreeing with certain aspects of each.
Kathryn
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
CHF
04/25/01 3:38 PM
RE: Did God murder Jesus?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To the Ghost Dogg:
I agree with you, and others, that IN AND OF ITSELF, the Penal substitution model doesn't describe the full benefits of Christ's Atoning work. What it does do, however, is elucidate what the TRANSACTION itself was. Was God paying of Satan, or was God fulfilling justice? Ultimately, it was justice. Triskal brought up the cup of wrath idea: I couldn't agree more! The New Testament talks about Christ RECONCILING us to God.
Eph2:13
But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.14 For he HIMSELF IS OUR PEACE, who has made the two one and has DESTROYED THE BARRIER, the dividing wall of HOSTILITY,15 by abolishing IN HIS FLESH THE LAW with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus MAKING PEACE,16 and in this one body to RECONCILE both of them TO GOD through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility.17 He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near.18 For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit."
We see that we are reconciled to God...the hostility was borne by Christ. So if it is we who are reconciled to God, how is it that the transaction on the cross could have been God fulfilling the required payment Satan needed? I really don't understand HOW this could be.
Eph.5:Be imitators of God, therefore, as dearly loved children
2 and live a life of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a FRAGRANT offering and sacrifice TO God.
Christ's death pleased God. Nuff said, right?
I said earlier that the Penal model elucidated this transaction, but wasn't a full exposition of the benefits of the atonement. We receive all sorts of mercies and graces because of the atonement, especially through the Ressurrection of Jesus Christ. We have been raised to new life, because of Christ; we are to be different, plus our new life has ransomed us OUT of darkness, not because Jesus paid off satan, but because of our new birth. Interesting stuff this thread is discussing. I'm eagerly anticipating other's ideas, too.
Grace
Craig
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
CHF
04/25/01 4:00 PM
RE: RE: Did God murder Jesus?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oops. Forgot to put this in my previous post:
Isaiah 53:10 Yet it was the LORD's WILL TO CRUSH HIM and CAUSE HIM TO SUFFER, and though the LORD makes his life A GUILT OFFERING, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.11 After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light [of life] and be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great,and he will divide the spoils with the strong,because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors."
He bore our iniquities to be a guilt offering to God(v10).
GDG, you said that you though it would be out of line for God's character if He would be the One executing Christ. No, not out of line: this was the ULTIMATE fulfillment of God's holy, righteous character. How could He be righteous and allow sinners in His presence? No evil deed goes unpunished! Christ VOLUNTARILY became a servant to fulfill justice and righteousness. This wasn't God "murdering the innocent". This is why the prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane is so important. Jesus knew the wrath to come, and asked for it to pass...God said "no"...Jesus says "not my will, but your will". Jesus gave Himself up WILLINGLY. It is great at this point to speculate about the content of Jesus' prayer (some of the best theologians were speculators!). I have heard it said that the prayer was probably God the Father revealing completely to the Son what His wrath would be like. Sound crazy? Naw! Jesus was sweating blood He was so intense! God revealed this to His Son so ALL requirements would be filled. Not only sinlessness, but also WILLINGNESS. God didn't leave His Son without the knowledge of what was to come, rather, He gave revelation to Jesus so His sacrifice would be complete. I think it would have been murder of the innocent had God not revealed to Jesus what this wrath entailed, but He did reveal it, and Jesus willingly laid His life down...not murder. The ultimate act of love: substitution.
Solus Christus
Craig
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Triskal
04/25/01 4:41 PM
The "cup" metaphor
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GDG said : "I don't think that the cup metphor can be limited to an association with wrath in Scripture. For example, in Psalm 23 it is used in the context of overwhelming blessing (cf. v. 5, "my cup runneth over") and in the Lord's Supper it symbolizes the New Covenant."
Okay, so if you're suggesting that the cup Jesus was referring to in the garden could have been "overwhelming blessings" or the "new covenant" then we'd get Jesus saying something like this:
"If it is possible, let this overwhelming blessing pass from me." or "If it is possible, let this new covenant pass from me."
Why would Jesus want to have an overwhelming blessing pass from him, and would that make him so stressed that he would sweat blood? During the last supper Jesus clearly stated that the cup he was drinking from at the time symbolized the new covenant.
I'm starting to lean towards a combination of the two views. What seems the most logical to me is that Jesus took our place SO THAT we could have new life.
In response to your second question about God murdering Jesus, what sounds most likely is that God USED humans to sacrifice Jesus.
Anyone have any input about this? I'm still trying to make sense of both views.
In His Grip,
Matt
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
ghost-dog-girl
04/25/01 6:08 PM
RE: The "cup" metaphor
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matt says: "Okay, so if you're suggesting that the cup Jesus was referring to in the garden could have been "overwhelming blessings" or the "new covenant"....."
GDG responds: I wasn't, I was just saying that the word "cup" does not unambiguously = "God's wrath poured out over sins" by citing other uses in Scripture where it means quite different things. You are importing a lot of theology into a three letter word that is being used figuratively.
Matt says: In response to your second question about God murdering Jesus, what sounds most likely is that God USED humans to sacrifice Jesus.
GDG responds: And that makes it better HOW? Please explain why it is better for God to use humans to sacrifice Jesus rather than doing it himself.
Matt says: I'm still trying to make sense of both views.
GDG responds: Me too. Let's keep each other on our toes and compare notes along the way.
Blessings on you. GDG
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Triskal
05/01/01 12:40 AM
RE: RE: The "cup" metaphor
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey GDG! Sorry it took me so long to respond. I've been down on the internet for the past few days trying to install my new motherboard and processor. I went to the MN state fair computer sale last weekend and got a 1.2GHZ Athlon... hahha it's fast!
GDG said: "the word "cup" does not unambiguously = "God's wrath poured out over sins" by citing other uses in Scripture where it means quite different things."
I'm not saying that it logically symbolizes God's wrath, but do you see any better meanings that you could ascribe to it? The "cup" metaphor is most commonly associated with God's wrath in the Bible. Research it for yourself and you'll find that to be true. The point is that God was carrying out his wrath on Jesus, and Jesus knew that already. That's why he was so stressed in the garden and started sweating blood. I don't know of anything other than God's wrath that would make Jesus sweat blood.
GDG said: "Please explain why it is better for God to use humans to sacrifice Jesus rather than doing it himself."
Obviously we know that humans were the ones who crucified Jesus on the cross, now to say that God had nothing to do with that is contradictory to scripture. In Matt. 26:31 Jesus quotes a prophecy about his death in Zech. 13:7, where the Lord declares, "I will strike the shephard, and the sheep will be scattered." The Lord was saying that HE would strike the shephard, i.e. Jesus.
In His Grip,
Matt
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Wislawa
05/01/01 2:05 AM
RE: RE: RE: The "cup" metaphor & the Eucharist
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G-D-G and Triskal: I know this is probably really bad exegesis (I only really do easy-gesis) but I’ve always heard a reference to the Eucharist behind the cup metaphor. Jesus sweating blood, cups present and all. I’m I just making this stuff up or do either of you see it too? Do you know of anyone who as tried to defend this? What bearing might it have on the atonement?
OK this is my last post for a few days. Gepers I don’t post anything for two months and now I spend a whole day just wearing my eyes out in front of the puter screen. I’ll leave y’all alone for a while and stop hogging all the posts.
Flupher-nutter
—Wislawa
Posted Originally From: Open Theism Information Site
ghost-dog-girl
05/01/01 8:23 AM
RE: RE: RE: RE: The "cup" metaphor & the Eucharist
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wislawa, I think an allusion to the eucharist is a real possibility. It is also likely that metaphor of the cup is pregnant with many allusions and implications. I tend to prefer this more concrete and tangible connection.
At the last supper Jesus passed the cup to all his disciples and told them it signified the new covenant in his blood, shed for the forgiveness of sins. Although they all swore they would never desert him, these same disciples were sleeping outside the garden, even though Jesus had woken them and commanded them to pray. Another disciple was on his way to garden, leading the chief priest to Jesus so he could be arrested. Kierkegaard says that this inward suffering was the worst of all, even greater than his physical suffering.
Wislawa, before you take another break, I just wanted to say that your punctuation is excellent. Wow, that sounds dorky, but your fine punctuation in your posts always impresses me.
Pomegranates, GDG
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Wislawa
05/03/01 12:02 AM
$(':.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Punctuation???: *;}&^$!”,].{[%>@)(<#’ How so? Are you making fun of my bad grammar or poor spelling? Or are you just commenting on how the posts are temporally punctuated? Something like a manic-depressive syncopation of them all or something?
Posted Originally From: Open Theism Information Site
ghost-dog-girl
05/03/01 10:53 AM
RE: $(':.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not making fun of you, I meant it—your punctuation is impressive. I wish I could say I meant something fancy, like temporally punctuated, or manic-depressive syncopation or whatever. But actually I just noticed your em dashes and your use of single quotes. Well done.
¡™£?¢§¶‡€£,
GDG
Posted Originally From: Christus Victor Ministries
Heather_Brink
05/03/01 11:51 PM
RE: The Atonement Debate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kathryn-
I think that to believe the Penal Substitution view you must first hold to the Christus Victor view. They must go hand in hand, you can't have the Penal Substitution view without the Christus Victor view and vice versa. My reasons for this statement are as follows...
Jesus Christ's death brings about our salvation, and His resurrection defeats Satan and other evil forces in the world. In order for Jesus' death for our sins to be meaningful and real then the primary purpose of it must have been to defeat the Satan and the evil in the world. Our salvation comes about only after the evil is destroyed. It is more meaningful and real because now Christ has power over even death itself and the outcomes of people's souls after they are dead.
It seems as though the only reasons why most people believe the penal substitution view or the moral government view for that matter is that it is easier for us to believe in. Easier in that it is we sometimes don't want to believe that there is evil in this world, and that there is a battle going on between the good and evil forces.
The Moral Government view (also described in Evangelical Options) allows us to believe that we are responsible for our own salvation. Jesus only needed to die as an example for us, and is contradictory to both the Christus Victor view and the Penal Substitution View. It can almost seem like our faith in God and our salvation is based upon our own good works.
So, in summary I believe that the purpose of Jesus Christ's death and resurrection was two-fold. First of all Jesus defeats Satan and the evil of the world, and second it allows us to have the gift of salvation. Both views are necessary and work together for the glory of God.
In Christ,
Heather
| | Back to Top | | |
 | Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 1:45 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|