22 Jul 11
Originally posted by DowardThe Atonement for me is the big stumbling block in Christianity. A God needing a blood sacrifice in order to forgive mankind of the fall in the Garden seems more than nuts. I'm amazed it does not turn more people off than it does. A pure savage concept of God is the picture that is painted. A return to primitive thinking where you needed Blood to appease an angry God. Nothing pretty about the Atonement.
I would like to read your thoughts and exegetical reasoning in regards to the atonement and its meaning. Not offering my own opinion, just looking to hear others
22 Jul 11
Originally posted by Dowarddo you mean the day of atonement or a personal atonement? the first is awaiting to come when all our deeds are held in balance. the second is if you feel you have a sin you wish to be forgiven or more than one, you do something for the good of your soul in the desire that god takes you and washs away your sins
I would like to read your thoughts and exegetical reasoning in regards to the atonement and its meaning. Not offering my own opinion, just looking to hear others
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
22 Jul 11
Originally posted by DowardIt's a very interesting concept with a grand myth attached; one of the grandest.
I would like to read your thoughts and exegetical reasoning in regards to the atonement and its meaning. Not offering my own opinion, just looking to hear others
Here's how I would introduce it to a bright child of mine who was curious about it:
The Atonement is sort of like what I'm going to tell you, but lots of people have different ideas about it, so you should keep an open mind about it till you learn more.
When people a long time ago first began to think about their situation, particularly the situations that come up living in a group, they wondered why, when love and cooperation is so good for everyone concerned, hatred and violent competition were so common. They already had a guess that, just like they themselves made things like tools and clothes, there was a powerful being who made them. Different groups of people had different ideas about this being, but most people had stories about powerful beings, that they passed down to their children. So the the story starts with the ways people explained the hatred and violence they saw in the world. The Atonement story is in the Bible. There are other stories, too, but this'll be my version of the Atonement story and what it means to me.
They imagined that like a good parent, a good creator, called God, would have told them what they needed to do to live a good life. There has always been a feeling that we are free to love or hate, to choose to get along or to commit violence. They believed God let the people choose. But there were temptations to disobey God. They chose to disobey God, and fell out of the state of natural goodness that God created them in. This fall from grace broke up the relationship that God had made possible. It would take a sacrifice for the natural state of grace could be restored. When Jesus came into the world, preached, and died, some of his followers believed that God had come, and in the mortal life and sacrificial death and resurrection of Jesus, God had reached out to bridge the gap and restore the original relationship. This got to be known as the Atonement, which restored our state of grace with God. Atoning is making up for a wrong that someone has done to someone, and making it so they can get along again.
After that, unfortunately, some humans continued using hatred and violence. This needed an explanation. People asked why the Atonement didn't restore all people to a state of natural grace and goodness. The explanation they came up with was that the original falling away of the people as a whole was atoned for, so reconciliation was now available to everyone, and was accepted by many. But people still had a choice.
Some could still be unaware of the gift of Atonement or could reject it.
Some people think it is up to them to spread the gospels and the story of Jesus and even more, to dedicate their lives to this effort. Some of them believe the explanation described things that really happened, just like the Bible says. Other Christians and people of other faiths or people having no specific faith, believe it to be a myth.
What's a myth? It is a handed-down story, that says something important about the early history of a people, or explains something about the world, usually with supernatural beings doing things. Are myths true? They can tell important truths about life. Each of us have to decide for themselves what those truths are. I believe the myth of the Fall and Atonement tells us how truly difficult and yet how truly important it has always been, to overcome the temptations that can result in hatred and violence. It's one of the most important things about life that there is.
22 Jul 11
Originally posted by JS357I would have (and do have) no problem telling the traditional Christian story. Something we moderns tend to forget is that we weren't there when the things described were happening, so our suppositions, even though they satisfy us, are just as speculative as anything written thousands of years ago, and perhaps more so. Consider: they were thousands of years closer to the events described; illiterate cultures generally have much more powerful and accurate memories; and it's even possible the stories are largely true, literally or allegorically.
It's a very interesting concept with a grand myth attached; one of the grandest.
Here's how I would introduce it to a bright child of mine who was curious about it:
The Atonement is sort of like what I'm going to tell you, but lots of people have different ideas about it, so you should keep an open mind about it till you learn more.
When people a long ...[text shortened]... t in hatred and violence. It's one of the most important things about life that there is.
Besides, it fits the facts. Don't believe me? Look around you. "Pie in the sky when you die" has nowhere near the Utopian-fantasy quotient of "the age of Aquarius" or even "why can't we all just get along?" when divided by human nature.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
22 Jul 11
Originally posted by pyxelated"Something we moderns tend to forget is that we weren't there when the things described were happening..."
I would have (and do have) no problem telling the traditional Christian story. Something we moderns tend to forget is that we weren't there when the things described were happening, so our suppositions, even though they satisfy us, are just as speculative as anything written thousands of years ago, and perhaps more so. Consider: they were thousands of year ...[text shortened]... of Aquarius" or even "why can't we all just get along?" when divided by human nature.
Nor were we there when they weren't happening. I would not (and did not) try to lodge in my child's brain, any idea that the stories were literal truth. But as a way to understand the fundamental issues of being human, the Fall/Atonement story as told in the Bible, is important to any study of the humanities.
22 Jul 11
Originally posted by JS357You know, at some point every normal child who's capable of it (and that's by far the majority) is going to make up his own mind anyway--after more-or-less consciously rejecting, or at least seriously questioning, whatever he was taught as a youngster. I don't think there's any harm, and possibly much good, in presenting what you accept as the truth as the truth; any contradiction between your teaching and reality is going to manifest itself sooner or later anyway, and if you care at all about your children, you aren't going to consciously teach them anything you know to be harmful.
"Something we moderns tend to forget is that we weren't there when the things described were happening..."
Nor were we there when they weren't happening. I would not (and did not) try to lodge in my child's brain, any idea that the stories were literal truth. But as a way to understand the fundamental issues of being human, the Fall/Atonement story as told in the Bible, is important to any study of the humanities.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
22 Jul 11
Originally posted by pyxelatedAgreed. I hope to hear more responses to the OP, as it may shape my story.
You know, at some point every normal child who's capable of it (and that's by far the majority) is going to make up his own mind anyway--after more-or-less consciously rejecting, or at least seriously questioning, whatever he was taught as a youngster. I don't think there's any harm, and possibly much good, in presenting what you accept as the truth as the ...[text shortened]... your children, you aren't going to consciously teach them anything you know to be harmful.
22 Jul 11
Originally posted by JS357Doh. Sorry for missing the point of your reply completely... you're right, I should have said something like "happening (or not)."
"Something we moderns tend to forget is that we weren't there when the things described were happening..."
Nor were we there when they weren't happening. I would not (and did not) try to lodge in my child's brain, any idea that the stories were literal truth. But as a way to understand the fundamental issues of being human, the Fall/Atonement story as told in the Bible, is important to any study of the humanities.
My point remains, however. We were not there, and traditions are not untrustworthy just because they are traditions, and we tend to give them less credit than they may be due.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
23 Jul 11
Originally posted by pyxelatedYes, our ancestors were not unwise about human nature and the stories they told around the nightly fire were in the most important senses, true.
Doh. Sorry for missing the point of your reply completely... you're right, I should have said something like "happening (or not)."
My point remains, however. We were not there, and traditions are not untrustworthy just because they are traditions, and we tend to give them less credit than they may be due.
08 Aug 11
2 edits
Originally posted by buckky====================================
The Atonement for me is the big stumbling block in Christianity. A God needing a blood sacrifice in order to forgive mankind of the fall in the Garden seems more than nuts. I'm amazed it does not turn more people off than it does. A pure savage concept of God is the picture that is painted. A return to primitive thinking where you needed Blood to appease an angry God. Nothing pretty about the Atonement.
A God needing a blood sacrifice in order to forgive mankind of the fall in the Garden seems more than nuts.
====================================
What may be unconventional for people is the concept that all sin must be judged. No sin is overlooked, glossed over, or forgotten.
At the cross of Jesus sin was judged. The forgiven sinner is not forgiven and his sins not judged. Rather he is forgiven because his sins have been dealt with and judged in Christ's sacrifice on the world's behalf.
The sinner is a deptor to God. A forgiven sinner is not a deptor whose dept has been overlooked and forgotten. A forgivine sinner is one who is no longer a deptor because the dept has been paid.
It seems that God decided before He created anything or anyone on a certain principle that He would keep no matter what - ALL sins must be judged.
God committed to this way before He created the universe. He would not give up His way for anything. He is a great lover of His creatures. He is a great lover of man. Yet He will not let His great love cause Him to negate His committment. All sins must be judged.
Man can be forgiven of his sins. But he cannot be forgiven without those sins being dwelt with in righteous judgment. Without the judging punishment for sin there can be no forgiveness.
But because the believer knows that his sins have been judged on the cross of Christ, he has great boldness. His salvation is more secure than if it were just based on love alone. It is a RIGHTEOUS salvation rather than a sentamental and permissive salvation.
The classic hymn says
"God would not have His claim on two.
Both on His Son, my surety true,
And then upon me laid."
===================================
I'm amazed it does not turn more people off than it does. A pure savage concept of God is the picture that is painted. A return to primitive thinking where you needed Blood to appease an angry God. Nothing pretty about the Atonement.
====================================
Because we are befuddled with an age of permissiveness we cannot understand that God would not overlook one single sin. We think He should just forget about what we did, gloss over it, disgragard it as unimportant.
But God's work of redemption is a matter of God satisfying His need and eternal commitment that all sin must be judged. He will not give up His way to deal with every single sin. Though He greatly loves man, He will not give up His nature which requires that every and all sins be judged.
The good news to us is that the Son of God took upon Himself this judgment for the sins of the world. "Christ also has suffered once for sins, the Righteous on behalf of the unrighteous" (1 Pet. 3:18)
Why do you you fault God that He has arrived at a way in which the penalty which was too heavy for us to bear, was borne on our behalf by Jesus Christ ? Here He keeps true to His love. But He also keeps true to His righteous nature to judge all sin.
Christ "Himself bore up our sins in His body on the tree" (1 Pet. 2:24) .
Seeing atonement's significance is a matter of realizing that God will not forgive before the son has been judged under divine penalty. God longs to forgive the transgressor. But He will not drop His righteous nature because of that deep longing. He will forgive because the sin has been punished in the body of Christ the Redeemer.
"This is My blood of the covenant, which is being poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins" (Matt. 26:28)
I am forgiven because my dept as been Paid in Full.
17 Aug 11
Let me make it clear. The unbeliever has the right to ask about "What this thing is with the Blood of Jesus?"
This is a good and valid question. It may be one not easy to answer them. But we who are Christians should study and attempt to answer.
Why does the Bible emphasize the blood of Christ ?
I have more to write. Let me bring up the topic to active status first.
17 Aug 11
2 edits
It is not easy. Some skeptics will walk away saying "It still doesn't make sense to me."
I understand that.
All forgiveness is not righteous forgiveness.
All forms of forgiveness are not equally RIGHT or equally righteous.
I may forgive you in a way which is sloppy and encourages you to commit the same crime against me again. This kind of forgiveness is sentimental and even harmful.
The forgiveness of God is a forgiveness that at the same time upholds God's dignity, glory, and righteous nature.
"You need forgiveness ? First let us be clear that this was an act which caused Me [God] to be reduced. "
Seriously now. What is forgiveness. It is when you accept loss. If I slap you on your face real hard, you face with smart. It will sting.
Now if I come back and say "Oh, I am sorry. Please forgive me" and you forgive men. What have you done. You have embraced that loss. You have taken that subtraction of your honor and dignity.
How does God show us that our sin has SUBTRACTED from God ? God is invisible, eternal, unseen. How can our sin be an afront and an assault upon Him? How does God show mankind that He embraces that LOSS and SUBTRACTION that our action has inccured against Him ?
He does so by incarnation and death. He does so by the cross upon which the Son of God died, carrying up our sins in His body onto the tree. It COST the Almighty to bear our iniquity.
It cost the Almighty to bear the sins of the whole world. And in one Person, on one occasion, with one act of obediance, God has included the sins of all time and all men in the death of Jesus. What a death !!
Because He is a man He is able to die and shed His blood. Because He is also God Himself the significance of His death has eternal effectiveness.
Judgment has taken place against sins.
Lost has be incurred and cost has been paid to atone for those sins.