I sometimes wonder if the only reason that Xns have successfully been able to tell their non Xn friends about penal substitution is because when they say “let me tell you about penal substitution” they’re expecting to hear a story about two lesbians and a sex toy.
Then when we start telling the story about the Nazi prison camp (a story used in Alpha courses) the one where a prisoner is about to be shot by the prison warden for some very minor offence. When an innocent fellow prisoner steps in and says shoot me instead, which the prison warden does. It’s a horrible shocking story. As shocking as anything Hollywood could come up with. Then as we say “Jesus is just like the innocent guy who dies”. I wonder is the quiet respectful response that we think people are giving is actually shock and astonishment as they process that we have just told a story about our loving God who is best represented by a cruel Nazi guard who is happy to kill an innocent man for a petty offence.
So how can we describe of the atonement
In my head at the moment I’ve got this image of Jesus, in his death, diving through the walls of reality as we know it and then coming back resurrected. This means that if we follow Jesus we will not die it means that God is bigger than what we see. The problem with being Christ like, being reconciled to God is that it seems to be all in vain but in Christ’s death and resurrection we are invited to take up our cross and follow him and be part of a new Kingdom that cannot be stopped even by death.
How I’ll flesh this out into a fuller atonement theory I’m not yet sure. It’s just a start. And I’m sure just like the penal substitution theory it will not completely explain all of the atonement, hopefully it might be just another face on the diamond that is all atonement narratives and that helps us to fully understand the atonement.
Then when we start telling the story about the Nazi prison camp (a story used in Alpha courses) the one where a prisoner is about to be shot by the prison warden for some very minor offence. When an innocent fellow prisoner steps in and says shoot me instead, which the prison warden does. It’s a horrible shocking story. As shocking as anything Hollywood could come up with. Then as we say “Jesus is just like the innocent guy who dies”. I wonder is the quiet respectful response that we think people are giving is actually shock and astonishment as they process that we have just told a story about our loving God who is best represented by a cruel Nazi guard who is happy to kill an innocent man for a petty offence.
So how can we describe of the atonement
In my head at the moment I’ve got this image of Jesus, in his death, diving through the walls of reality as we know it and then coming back resurrected. This means that if we follow Jesus we will not die it means that God is bigger than what we see. The problem with being Christ like, being reconciled to God is that it seems to be all in vain but in Christ’s death and resurrection we are invited to take up our cross and follow him and be part of a new Kingdom that cannot be stopped even by death.
How I’ll flesh this out into a fuller atonement theory I’m not yet sure. It’s just a start. And I’m sure just like the penal substitution theory it will not completely explain all of the atonement, hopefully it might be just another face on the diamond that is all atonement narratives and that helps us to fully understand the atonement.
3 comments:
Well Chris,
I have been reading through some of your stories and even tho your style is amusing most of us have had similar experiences. I don't have any idea of what an Xn is or even if it is significant but I do know a bit about this word atonement and what it means relative to Jesus' crucifixion. Perhaps you might consider this thought process. Since it is not associated to any contemporary church's teaching you might run with it long enough and get to a place that suites you and not wind up with any conflict with the scriptures.
Consider that the crucifixion of Jesus is an atonement for the reasonable reason for God to make a change to something that is not reasonable. Regarding that Jesus says that guilt relative to sin remains as an outstanding issue after his crucifixion and the issue is unilateral, as in reconciled to, search the scriptures for supporting documentation.
Hey there Theodore,
I'm not sure I quite follow. Can you flesh your idea out a bit? Thanks!
Chris
See Gen. 9:5c NIV. Substitutionary atonement is a false idea that supposes that a direct positive benefit can be the result of Jesus' crucifixion. Gen. 9:5 is a preexisting rule of God which over rules that concept. However Gen. 9:5c is only relevant to Jesus' crucifixion. At some point in time each man will have to give a direct account to God regarding the fact of one man's life having been taken by bloodshed. Jesus' death, since his life was lost by bloodshed and God's set purpose for each man is to give an account for one man's life taken by bloodshed, atoned for a reasonable basis to make a change to the law of God. See Heb 7:12. Therefore the Acts 2:38 command can only be obeyed by confessing directly to God that you are sorry Jesus was crucified or disobey the command Repent. In other words it is a sin not to repent of Jesus' crucifixion.
"It is not those who hear the law
who are righteous in God's sight,
but it is those who obey the law
who will be declared righteous."
Rom. 2:13
Post a Comment