A RESCUE, NOT A PAYMENTWestern churches, following the lead of the 11th century bishop Anselm, have read way too much into the forensic metaphors of atonement that are scattered throughout the New Testament. This isn't to deny that in some way Christ's death was a substitutionary offering to save us -- only that we can read too much penal into that offering.
Okay, that is a bit of convoluted introduction to Frederica Mathewes-Green's article on Beliefnet.com (a reprint from her book First Fruits of Prayer) in which she spells out a more traditional Eastern Church understanding of what exactly it is that Christ did for us.
3 comments:
What's bugging you about the substutionary attonement theory? It seems a bunch of other guys on abet are bugged by it too. What gives?
Brad, very interesting. Thanks for sharing that perspective with us.
Ted
Ultrarev asks: "What's bugging you about the substutionary attonement theory?"
1. It's not substitutionary atonement per se -- but penal substitutionary atonement that is the issue. And it's not that forensic overtones aren't allowed but they have been over-applied -- over-interpreted.
2. Is PSA faithful to the intention and teaching of scripture? Or is it more of a product of a certain culture?
3. Does PSA portray God as inherently angry?
There are lots of good books dealing with the issue. One of my favorite's these days is Recovering the Scandel of the Cross: Atonement in NT and Contemporary Contexts by Joel Green and Mark Baker (IVP).
Post a Comment