Lessons on the Atonement from Jonathan Edwards, I...
(Tim: first in a series from David Wegener) Tucked away in my two-volume compilation of many of the works of Jonathan Edwards is a section titled, “Remarks on Important Theological Controversies.” I'll be summarizing one part of this section subtitlted “Of Satisfaction for Sin." But first, let me introduce exactly why Edward's essay is important.
In today’s theological climate, particularly through the influence of the Emergent church and the hipness of the Anabaptist movement, many are questioning the traditional Protestant doctrine of the Atonement; that is, the penal substitutionary doctrine of the atonement. On the Cross, did Christ really take our place? Was it really for our sins that He suffered and died? Did God really punish Christ in our stead?
Taking their cue from Feminist and Anabaptist theologians, Emergent church leaders consider the traditional Protestant doctrine of the Atonement to be cosmic child abuse. An angry Father has punished His Son for wrongs the Son did not commit. Isn’t that what we'd call child abuse? Isn’t our society trying to enact laws to prevent just this kind of thing? Is this the message we should preach from our pulpits? Does it really square with God's love or justice?
Even evangelical leaders are wondering if Christ's Atonement was really necessary? Couldn’t God have chosen another way?
Back then to Jonathan Edwards. How would he have viewed the assertion that the substitutionary Atonement is divine child abuse? Would he have considered this question even to be within the boundaries of Christian theology?
We can thank God Edwards gave his time to thinking long and hard on Christ’s death, so let's take these questions back to him and reap the fruit of his work.
Clearnote Churches
Clearnote Fellowship
Christ the Word
Monthly archive
- June 2013 (16)
- May 2013 (28)
- April 2013 (33)
- March 2013 (43)
- February 2013 (28)
- January 2013 (41)
- December 2012 (31)
- November 2012 (37)
- October 2012 (38)
- September 2012 (21)
- August 2012 (28)
- July 2012 (46)
Popular Posts
Tags
Recent Comments
- Craig French on Hold me back...
- Roger Keane on Hold me back...
- Bert Perry on Hold me back...
- T. Russell Hunter on The difference between pro-life and anti-antiabortion...
- Tim Bayly on Good church in Gainesville, Florida?
Comments
Call me curious; which Anabaptists are questioning the substitutionary atonement along these lines? (being a Baptist, but recognizing that some roots of the Puritan Baptists are in the Mennonites, it would seem incumbent upon myself to educate myself on this.....)
And call me amused that we would call Anabaptists "hip." Are Amish black carriages the in thing this year? Have I missed the Mennonite styles at Dress Barn? Obviously, I am missing something, and if the author or others would be so kind as to point me to what's going on.....
- Mark D. Baker, Mennonite Brethren Biblical Seminary, co-author of "Recovering the Scandal of the Cross"
- J. Denny Weaver, Bluffton University, author of "The Nonviolent Atonement"
- John Driver, Goshen College, author of "Understanding the Atonement for the Mission of the Church"
- Thomas Finger, formerly of Eastern Mennonite Seminary, "A Contemporary Anabaptist Theology," co-author, "Atonement and Violence"
Anabaptist/Mennonite dress styles are not in vogue, at least as far as this African knows. But in Emergent and CT circles, their views are indeed "hip."
Thank you, David. It seems that no one can rest from the depradations of that hungry lion, old scratch. I would have thought that the personal separation of the Mennonites might have protected them a bit--though one (formerly?) mennonite coworker ought to have disabused me of that notion. (four children by three dads, painted on jeans, tattoos....obviously Mennonite culture did not protect her!)
Interestingly, no-one on that side of the debate is going back to C.S. Lewis. While he certainly believed that Christ's death on the cross had made it possible for us to be restored to relationship with God, he could not see how Christ's death was 'substitutionary'. In the interests of sparking some debate, I've included his thoughts on the matter below. Lewis wrote:
We are told that Christ was killed for us, that His death has washed out our sins, and that by dying He disabled death itself. That is the formula. That is Christianity. That is what has to be believed. Any theories we build up as to how Christ's death did all this are, in my view, quite secondary: mere plans or diagrams to be left alone if they do not help us, and, even if they do help us, not to be confused with the thing itself. All the same, some of these theories are worth looking at.
The one most people have heard is the one about our being let off because Christ volunteered to bear a punishment instead of us. Now on the face of it that is a very silly theory. If God was prepared to let us off, why on earth did He not do so? And what possible point could there be in punishing an innocent person instead? None at all that I can see, if you are thinking of punishment in the police-court sense. On the other hand, if you think of a debt, there is plenty of point in a person who has some assets paying it on behalf of someone who has not. Or if you take "paying the penalty," not in the sense of being punished, but in the more general sense of "footing the bill," then, of course, it is a matter of common experience that, when one person has got himself into a hole, the trouble of getting him out usually falls on a kind friend.
Ross, where is that quote found? My guess is that it was written later in his life.
Lewis sent "Mere Christianity" to four friends (clergrymen) from different denominations before it was published. He wanted some comments. The Catholic wrote that Lewis undervalued the atonement. The Methodist said Lewis didn't even really mention the doctrine of justification by faith.
That Lewis quote is from Mere Christianity, Chapter 4 ("The Perfect Penitent").
This is a frustrating post. It doesn't give us a link to what JE said! Please let us know.
On the Anabaptists: I expect there's a good deal of picking and choosing in the hipness of their system, in the style of Jefferson's Bible. Probably not too many of the liberals who like them are taking up the Mennonite idea of staying out of politics.
Add new comment