What is The Atonement?

I understand your plight. It surprises me how much your journey is similar to mine. Although I think you have better resources to draw on than I do, with your college classes, Hebrew etc. My personal journey led me to let go of Christianity.

quote:

---

i do not know how to reconcile this.

---

In my search back through the evolution of Christianity, I found the Nazarenes and I'm sure you have too.The Nazarenes, actual disciples and followers of the living Jesus, did not believe that Jesus was God incarnate, they did not believe he was a sacrifice for sins. They were still Jewish and all that that entails.If it doesn't reconcile, it doesn't reconcile.I don't picture you taking up apologetics. Christianity seems to be an ecclectic concoction of religions of the time. So either we take Christianity as it is presented or we don't.Personally, I feel it makes more sense to make things right with the person you offend or harm. No one else can really do that for you.Take care

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

This was rude and uncalled for.My apologies, Jar.I don't know what gets into me sometimes. Must be the liquor.This message has been edited by robinrohan, 10-14-2005 07:16 AM

This message has been edited by Phat, 10-14-2005 06:29 AM

That's not exactly how I see it but I know that many folk try to pitch pablum like that. I hope you don't think that I have that little respect for you or what you're capable of doing.Love God and love others as you love yourself is simple, but it sure as hell isn't easy.The first thing in that statement is often overlooked. Way to many folk hear and somehow miss the fact that the second of the Great Commandments is a two parter.Love others as you love yourself.That second part is probably the hardest step in the whole process. To love yourself you first need to know yourself, both the good and the bad. You then have to try, even if you don't succeed, to get your own life together.That's work, unpleasant, easy to try to cop out of through some pablum concept like "We're all sinners" or other such crap.Please understand that I'm not trying to convert you to Christianity or any other such brainwashing nonsense. If a person can do what's needed under the second Great Commandment they'll enjoy life. The first Great Commandment will take care of itself.If one works towards the second Commandment, starting with trying to figure out how one loves oneself, then trying to love others in the same way, whether they are Atheist, Agnostic, Buddhist, Confucian, Satanist, Hindu, Muslim or whatever, their life improves.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Yes, Jesus death was but part of his life.One of the, at least for me, sad things about the teachings of Jesus, but also one of the most miraculous features, is that his ministry was only a few years. He only lived about 33 years and we have accounts of only those few years when he began expanding his ministry beyond his family.Jesus death was at the hands of man. One reason that I think the accounts might be true is the fact that they are so different from other such accounts in the Bible.Look at the Mack Sennett comedy called the Flight from Egypt. There we see GOD the Director stage managing everything for maximum effect.Moshe says "Let my people go!"Pharoah says "Okay."God the Director says, "Wait, I just don't see that. We need more drama. Harden Pharoah's heart and make him change his mind. And leave it as a cliffhanger so we can get them back in next week."The story of Jesus death doesn't play out like that. It's far more what one would expect if it were an account of a real event.Jesus death was but a part of normal life in that era. Remember, on the day he was crucified, he was only one of three that we know about, in a small backwater provence of Rome. It's likely that there were hundreds if not thousands of people crucified throughout the Empire on the very same day.But what if he had lived, and taught, across a lifespan similar to the Buddha, Confucius or Mencius?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

LOLNo problem my friend.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I think that the accounts in the synoptics are the ones most likely to reflect the historical Jesus. I think so not only because they sound more plausible (excluding the resurrection) but also they contain the least metaphysical elements (compared to Paul, John & others) and they were written within the generation of Jesus.Paul's letters were also written within the the generation of Jesus, but by a man who didn't know Jesus and -by the looks of it- didn't even know what Jesus taught. John, on the other hand, was written much later and contains influences that I find difficult to attribute to an uneducated Jewish man in his nineties (as the alleged author, John, would have been at the time of writing).Jesus' teachings and life, in the context of the synoptics accounts, makes sense and commands respect.It's when I try to put it in the context of the rest of the Christian mythology and doctrine that it all gets muddled up and ridiculous.

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

I understand and appreciate your open-minded, tolerant theology.

As I understand it, crucifixion involve the nail going through just above the wrist joint - between the two forearm bones and through the main bundle of nerves that serve the hand. That, and the crooked knee position mean the victim must haul himself up on those nerves to breath, leading to excruciating pain. Also, a person hauling themselves up on nailed hands would soon rip their hands in two but by nailing through the wrist, the support is sufficiently strong to last as long as possible.Consider that God knew where the nails would go when he designed the route of the nerves...

As long as you bear in mind that it is Jars theology.I wonder about the emphasis on the second greatest commandment instead of the first. Probably because folk can't figure out the following conundrum:How does one love God with all...etc, etc...when they don't even know him. Surely it's impossible to love someone you don't know. Add on "with all your heart, soul and mind" an the impossible becomes ridiculous...

Ain't that the truth.I think that's probably the message of the "Way is wide but the Gate is narrow" and perhaps the most misunderstood part of Christianity.IMHO the quote above is directed straight at Christians. Too many of them seem to think they've been given some Get out of Hell Free" card, that they're in and everone else is out.I don't think that's what it means at all.I think it's refering to those Christians that forget that everything hangs on the two Great Commandments. When Christians discriminate against others, whether other Christians, Non-Christians, Gays or just take any exclusionary position, then IMHO, they miss the gate.Paul was building a franchise. He was a great man but terribly flawed. He had no problem twisting facts to meet the needs of the franchise and was one hell of a spin doctor.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

God is Love. God is Wrath. God is Just. God is perfect. God is thus: perfectly Loving, Perfectly Just, Perfectly Wrathful. Love MUST do what love must do. The same with just-ness and wrath. God's plan must satisfy EACH of these attributes perfectly. He cannot for instance, just nod and wink at sin. Sin is athema to God. He hates sin because sin is dark and "in him there is no darkness at all". But he loves us even though he hates the sin in us.A mans actions must be judged justly - perfectly justly. And they will be. They will be compared to Gods own standard and weighed accordingly. When it is judged and seen as sinful it must be cast out from his presence and punished. Think of our own judicial system: the person is convicted by justice, taken away from society and punished (wrath). When you arrive in court on charges you don't expect to be told "we're forgetting what you've done, your free to go"Now, God knew we would sin. He knew his justice demanded a trial (judgement) and he knew his wrath demanded punishment for sin when we were convicted of breaking the law. But he also loves us. So he thought of a way whereby these three attributes of his could be perfectly satisfied.He found a substitute. Someone stepped up and said that they would take the punishment for the crime instead of the person who committed it. It couldn't be just anybody. It had to be a person who God would consider a suitable sacrifice. It had to be someone who was in a position to understand what it would involve. It had to be someone capable of taking the punishment for all sin. It could only be God himself who could take it.By sustituting Jesus for those who would accept Gods way, God could satisfy those three attributes: all sin can be judged, all sin can be punished. And his love too be satisfied.So, either stand up on front of the Judge with your sin on your own account and be judged and be found guilty and be cast out "into outer darkness where there will (not surprisingly) be wailing and gnashing of teeth". Or take up Gods offer and have your sin punished by someone who takes the punishment for you.(Its worth nothing that the OT pictures of sacrifice don't deal with sin finally, completely. They 'cover' sin. Hide it from view. Until such a time as it could be dealt with fully. At the cross.)(it's worth noting how ones attitude might be changed by God if they invite him in. A person who realises what God has done for them will look at the cross in wonder. They will see the judgment and wrath poured out and shiver. And they will see the love that figured out a way for them to come back and start to..."love God with all their heart soul and mind")

Having just gotten through Leviticus and half of Numbers being read on a dramatized CD (forgive my own faulty faith biases) I’m eager to offer feedback on this sensitive topic:OT sacrifices seemed a ”covering’ for *minor* sin(s); death for *major* sins (see below).The land of Canaan was full of major sins (e.g., adultery, witchcraft, murder, *profaning*, bestiality, incest, rape, burning of children, etc.). Essentially, the “land would spew them out” if *repentance* and/or *holiness* was not attained.There were sin-offerings, whole-burnt offerings, wave-offerings, trespass-offerings, wave-offerings, scape-goats, atonement(s), etc., and extremely complex ordinances pertaining to a “very holy”, “pure and holy”, and “most holy” God and people.Many sincere Christians that I know eat this stuff up: They perceive God-looking-at-Jesus Christ’s *full sacrificial atonement* instead of the *hell-fire we deserve*. Hence, every sacrifice typifies a *bloody* Christ. (Ziporah, Mose’s wife, called Moses “a bloody man”).Now (as an aspiring theist), how am I supposed to approach a very holy God with nothing but my *bloody* sinful nature and unholy works?Seems it behooves my conscience to grab an *eternal sacrifice* as a *peace-offering* if at all possible, as I come face-to-face with the Holy One. Hence, while I care about Christ’s example of life as most excellent . His Passover-sacrifice and Resurrection on High seems:
1) More reliable hell-fire-insurance.
2) More self-sacrificing example of love.
3) More parsimonious a mechanism to face my “pure and holy” Maker

Some things here I cannot reconcile... Hate is not the act of a being that 'is' Love His 'hate' must surely be darkness? Surely we can't apply our earthly view of juctice to God?? you are very selective when you do this. it takes from your credibility. But yet we are all still condemned, as sinners, to go to hell. It seems this 'sacrifice' was totally in vain. Who, if anyone, was spared the ravages of hell by jesus' sacrifice? Does it say this explicitly or is this just your reading of it?This message has been edited by AdminJar, 10-14-2005 12:32 PM

Yes, Jar's ideas could hardly be called orthodox.