tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3283698189135504357.post683743008222114440..comments2023-10-31T16:20:17.691+00:00Comments on Charismata: Communities and AtonementDechttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14416263247593607473noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3283698189135504357.post-27843034288580451352012-01-20T17:42:42.641+00:002012-01-20T17:42:42.641+00:00"Allowing it" is a bit weak all right. J..."Allowing it" is a bit weak all right. Jesus doesn't so much allow the cross to happen to him as he does "move towards it and provoke it", in the words of Yoder. We can perhaps speak of the triune God's atoning work with this kind of active language.<br /><br />I do think that vengeance is God's and He will repay it, but that future tense that Paul uses in Romans 12 should probably have a bearing on how we understand the cross.Dechttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14416263247593607473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3283698189135504357.post-57273182000190332822012-01-20T17:29:34.713+00:002012-01-20T17:29:34.713+00:00hmmm. I understand questioning the ethics that res...hmmm. I understand questioning the ethics that result from holding the juridical-penal model and i look forward to seeing what the likes of yourself and zoom bring to the table in years to come. <br />As for holding that God's role at the cross was only "allowing it" i have yet to be convinced of. <br />What does your readings tell about the what happens in hell? Is that not a violent place?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3283698189135504357.post-92078502304468687422012-01-20T15:49:45.376+00:002012-01-20T15:49:45.376+00:00There is a book called the Nonviolent Atonement, w...There is a book called the Nonviolent Atonement, whose argument I read in a condensed form in a book called Atonement and Violence. I remember there being significant flaws, but I definitely think there is much further discussion needed on the topic of the atonement and violence.<br /><br />The cross is certainly violent to the extent that it displays the violence of Rome, the violence of powers and principalities. But what a nonviolent atonement wants to say is that we are not saved by the violence of humanity (or divinity), but by the nonviolence of the triune God.<br /><br />Thomas Finger has this to say:<br /><br />"It is the powers, ranged over against God, who inflict the death penalty although Jesus was innocent. God does not inflict such a penalty, save in the indirect sense of allowing it to be exacted, without intervening violently to prevent it, because this was an inevitable consequence of their mission of self-sacrificing love.<br /> Therefore, it was unjust for Jesus to pay a penalty he did not deserve; yet not because God demands such penalties – but because the powers of evil do."<br /><br />This is undoubtedly further evidence of my cheaply bought theological anabaptism, but I do think the ethical dimension of atonement "theory" has been criminally ignored, and that the juridical-penal model holds a theological-ethical power that should be seriously questioned.Dechttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14416263247593607473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3283698189135504357.post-72901216546585676762012-01-20T15:08:05.030+00:002012-01-20T15:08:05.030+00:00I must be missing something basic here... but ther...I must be missing something basic here... but there is very little about the cross that suggests a non-violent atonement.?<br /><br />Perhaps we can say that christ took the violence on himself so that we don't have to put it on others? <br /><br />I wouldnt be interested in getting rid of the Juridical-penal model for the sake of christian community. But if i were shown it was wrong- well that would be a different thing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com