| Author | Message | ||
| Jeremiah Registered user Username: Jeremiah Post Number: 18 Registered: 1-2004  |
For you theology types here... Here's an article about the Atonement, which really made me think. I actually know some former SDA's who believe similar to what this article is about. This seems to sound biblical to me, but I'd like to hear other people's opinions about this. http://home.messiah.edu/~rcollins/Atone.htm Jeremiah | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3148 Registered: 12-2003  |
Jeremiah, I find that the articled at this link tends to bring God "down" into a more human frame of reference instead of allowing His inscrutable sovereignty to simply "be". I do not disagree with many of the author's conclusions; I find, though, that his attempt to explain the atonement in terms of Jesus making God's love more accessible, more "like us" instead of being remote and unattainable because it is strictly divine to be placing the emphasis in the wrong place. This article makes humanity the object and subject of God's love and forgiveness. Atonement was about US, restoring us, forgiving us, making God personal and accessible. I see the Biblical picture of the atonement to be about God, not about us. Because God is both Love and Justice (the author points out that God IS love; love is not merely an attribute of God. I believe the Biblical picture, though, shows that "justice" is equally who God is. His love is inseparable from His justice; to make one more defining than the other is to present an warped picture of God), He had to manage the problem of sin which, through His sovereign permission, arose in the universe. The author also comments (and seems to assume) that human sinfulness is through no choice of our own. We are sinners by birth, not by choice; therefore, Jesus becomes human and forgives us by making Himself accessible to us and rescuing us from our fate. The Bible, however, clearly says that all men are without excuse, that the knowledge of God has been cclearly revealed, but men have suppressed this knowledge by their wickedness. Yes, we inherited our spiritual death from Adam. At the same time, we are held completely accountable for our sin. God asks each of us to respond to His forgiveness by repenting. I don't disagree that Jesus' incarnation did make God's love more accessible to us; I just disagree that the ppoint was to arrange things so humans could "understand" and experience God. The point was to exonerate God's glory and Justice and, rather than to make His love more "human" for our benefit, His purpose was to destroy the power of sin so we could become more like Him. The result of the atonement was not that God's love became more human-friendly. The result was that humans can be reborn by the indwelling of God Himself. We become more like God rather than God submitting Himself to becoming more like humans. This result is not because humanity is God's great value in the universe; rather, this result is because God Himself is His own greatest value. God's sovereign justice, mercy, love, wrath, inscrutability, faithfulness, etc. is the focus of the atonement. We are the recipients of God's faithfulness to Himself. God's faithfulness to Himself is what makes Him faithful to us. He is not faithful to us because He is loyal to us. He is faithful to us because He cannot disown Himself (see 2 Timothy 2:11-13). I think the author of this article has a too limited view of God. He writes from a perspective of man's ultimate worth, of God honoring man by making Himself accessible. Instead, I believe the Biblical picture of God and His atonement is only partially revealed. God's sovereignty is shrouded in mystery we cannot yet see because we are limited by our finiteness. We are not the center of and the object of God's ultimate loyalty and affection. We are loved beyond measure, to be sure, but God's ultimate concern is His Own Glory. Jesus' incarnation was about revealing God in His inscrutable love and power and justice. It was not about condensing God into human terms so we could access His love. It was, instead, about revealing God so we would surrender to Him and allow Him to make us new in Him. I think the author has his framework "backwards". He says the incarnation was about making God's love more human-like to we could share it. I believe the incarnation was about exposing the very un-human power and love of God so we would be willing to be transformed increasingly into His likeness. The point of salvation was not to bring God's love to us; it was to restore us to intimacy with Godónot through the power of God's accessible love but through the power of His own Person: through Jesus the Son and through the Holy Spirit who draws us to God. I don't think I've done a very good job articulating my reactions to this article. I just found it very limited and limiting. I believe the atonement and the incarnation were more about God than about us. We are the objects of His miraculous love and regeneration. Colleen | ||
| Jeremiah Registered user Username: Jeremiah Post Number: 19 Registered: 1-2004 |
Thanks for that reply, Colleen; it's good for me to hear what your reaction to this article is. I need to hear things from other people's perspective or I might get way off track and not realize it. One thing about your reply has me a little worried though. When you say that God is ultimately worried about his own glory, that makes me wonder if God is selfish, since us humans are told NOT to worry about OUR own glory. (I think so anyway?) Could God be telling us to do something that is the opposite of what God himself does? Is there a pattern where the Father always glorifies the Son and the Son always glorifies the Father, rather than the Father glorifying himself, etc? I know I've heard about this in my SDA growing up years... Jeremiah | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3152 Registered: 12-2003 |
God the Father and God the Son are both God. They absolutely glorify each other. Shortly before his crucifixion, Jesus asked the Father to glorify Him with the glory He had with Him before. The cross was the means of that glorification. Yes, God does ask us to do things that are different from what He does. He is the sovereign God, the Creator. The end of Ephesians 3 says, "Now to him who is able to do far more than we can ask or imagine according to His power that is at work in us, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations forever and ever. Amen." The purpose of the church--those who are born again--is to glorify God. The purpose of Christ's sacdrifice and resurrection is to glorify God. The purpose of God saving us is to glorify Himself. Look at Ephesians 1:11-14. Paul says, speaking of the Jewish believers, that they were chosen in Him before creation "that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory." And the Gentiles who believed were also included and sealed by the Holy Spirit "to the praise of His glory." In Ezekiel 20 God says, "But for the sake of my name I did what would keep it from being profaned in the eyes of the nationsÖ" (verse 7, 14, 22). Exodus repeatedly says that God "hardened Pharaoh's heart". In 7:15-17 he tells Moses to say to pharaoh, "For by now I could have streteched out my hand and struck you and your people with a plague that would have wiped you off the earth. But I have raised you up for this very pupsoe, that I might show you my power and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." Exodus 14:4 says, "And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and he will pursue them. But I will gain glory for myself through Pharaoh and all his army, and the Egyptians will know that I am the Lord." God delivered Israel from Egypt visibly and against huge odds precisely so His name would be exalted and glorified in the nations. When trhe spies took refuge in Rahab's house in Jericho, she said that the reputation of their God had preceded them, and the people feared Him. She placed her faith in Him and risked her life to save the spies. It was because of God's reputation that she risked what she risked. So yes, God is God. He is 100% complete in Himself. He has need of nothing and no one to be complete. But because of His great love, He created us (and other sentient beings like angels) and gives us roles to play in the proclaiming and revelation of His glory. We cannot anthropomorphize God and say that because we aren't to glorify ourselves, God wouldn't either. God's ultimate goal is to glorify Himself and to draw us into His glory. We do not have original life. Our life is derived from God. In Him we live and move and have our being. We are incomplete without Him. Our purpose is to surrender to Him and to honor Him and to allow Him to glorify Himself through us. His purpose is to honor and glorify His name by demonstrating His kindness to us expressed through His redemption of usóand through countless other ways of which we truly have no knowledge. The Bible tells us that God cannot lie; He cannot be unfaithful; He cannot disown himself; He is love. There is no darkness in Him. He is incapable of treachery or cruelty. His central desire to glorify Himself is not selfish; it is the demonstration of the truth of reality. All of creation, life, and reality derives from and witnesses to God. He is the ultimate "value" in the universe. History is really His story. We are called, chosen, and blessed to have a part in His story--but the story is His, not ours. He transcends humanity and time. His purpose is not to glorify His creatures as being noteworthy and special in the universe; His purpose is to glorify us by drawing us into His glory. It's all about Him--it's just not about us! He Is Awesome! Colleen | ||
| Dinolf Registered user Username: Dinolf Post Number: 29 Registered: 8-2005 |
Jeremiah: I just posted some ideas about this matter under the thread "God didnt change the law!". I think there is a good point to be aware that there are several different metaphores to explain the atonement. Metaphores with different historical and congregational backgrounds. Read my message under the thread mentioned above and give response if you find it of interest. /Dinolf | ||
| Lisa_boyldavis Registered user Username: Lisa_boyldavis Post Number: 136 Registered: 3-2005 |
Jeremiah, I think your struggle with ideology surrounding God and what God's motives are sound very strongly SDA which to me says something about how entrenched those beliefs can be, a challenge to me to carefully think about what I've still retained, and what needs to go for a purely Biblical view on God and the world. The most wonderful thing about God being sovereign is that it's up to Him to save me. All theology has implications to the way in which I experience His Sacrifice. That's why God's request to Honor Him is not only ok for Him to do, but all-important for my SURVIVIAL. LBD |
