Atonement, Pt. 3: Additional Theories
Oct.16, 2009 in
Podcast Episodes
After devoting entire episodes to both of the two most widely-held theories, Ray and Steve present a potpourri of other theories in one episode. Four different views are presented in this discussion, including the third of the “top three” views of the atonement.
Far from being a dry topic, Ray and Steve infuse their own brand of humor into the discussion as much as possible, including the introduction of the first ever Beyond the Box drinking game! 😉
Join us next week for a wrap-up discussion of the entire subject and the conclusion of this 4-part series.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 55:54 — 38.4MB) | Embed
October 17th, 2009 at 9:03 am
Love this series.
Just now listening to this episode (about half way through) and you guys are talking about how the different views of the atonement effects our view of sin. While I agree, I think we also need to look at reality. Penal substitution does not seem to help fix the sin problem. It only recognizes it and makes the judgment of innocence or guilt but does not abolish it.
Its like we are swimming in a sea of sin, then we ‘get saved’ and are freed from the effects of sin. But to an outsiders view, very little if anything actually changes. Sure maybe there is a change for the first year or two while we are still on the new believer high, but give it time and we all tend to gravitate back to the primordial pond of our sin nature.
I am not sure anything different would occur with those who hold a different view of the atonement, however, maybe we would actually overcome sin when we get a glimpse of God’s love for us. This seems overshadowed by God’s justice and holiness in the view that promotes drinking (penal substitution – take another drink).
One of the better teaching I have heard on this is found here:
http://www.lifestream.org/transition.php
Thanks for the great show, now I need to get back to listening to the rest of this episode.
October 22nd, 2009 at 11:53 pm
Barry,
Thanks for your input. I think you are right in saying that, in the penal view, God’s love is overshadowed by His justice and holiness. It is almost like people view God’s love and justice as yin and yang. Equal opposite forces in God that keep the universe in balance. I think that this is a very wrong concept of who God is. I think that God is love, and that his justice is simply a reflection of that love and could simply be described as his passion to “put the world to rights” (as NT Wright says).
Our views of justice have been largely shaped by our western context. In the west we have this concept of “blind justice”; that is that justice should mean everyone gets the exact same consequence or reward for similar behavior without regard to his/her personal makeup or circumstances. This idea is sometimes illustrated in our judicial system by the statue of a goddess with a blindfold on, holding a pair of scales in her hand. But, this concept of justice is unintelligible in some other cultures. In other cultures, justice is seen as simply “making things right”. Instead of holding to a strict sense of “fairness”, in these cultures justice is less about retribution and more about restoration. I think that God is also more about restoration and reconciliation than retribution (hows that for alliteration!). He wants to put the world to rights because He loves us!