Atonement Metaphors

[Anonymous]

How do you feel about the atonement? I admit to mixed feelings on the concept of atonement.

What I don’t love:

– that it creates a religion of losers, appealing to the down-and-outers. Dennis Miller once observed that the prison inmates always seem to find Jesus when no one else down here will talk to them anymore.

– that it is a contrasting idea to theosis (the seeds of divinity within man), a concept which I find inherently more appealing. I’d rather focus on strengths & potential than weakness and shortcomings.

– the idea of justice and mercy that is represented feels man-made and not like something that God would be bound to follow. I don’t like the legalistic metaphors often used to explain the atonement.

Anyway, I had to give a talk on this in April, and here are some interesting atonement thoughts I turned up, and how LDS theology differs from some of these historical Christian metaphors for atonement (all of which I’m sure I’ve heard growing up in the church). I liked the idea that there are many different ways to interpret the atonement, and some of these are more appealing to me than others. How about you?

From my talk:

A belief in the atonement is something common to all Christian sects. Here are a few of the ways the atonement has been viewed over the centuries, each with a unique insight:

– Ransom Theory. In this metaphor from the 4th century, Jesus liberates mankind from slavery to Satan and thus death by giving his own life as a ransom. Victory over Satan consists of swapping the life of the perfect (Jesus), for the lives of the imperfect (mankind). A variation of this view is known as the “Christus Victor” theory, in which Jesus defeats Satan in a spiritual battle and frees the enslaved humans from their captor. (like an action movie with hostages being rescued)

– Penal Substitution. Another metaphor, from the 11th century, is that man is in debt to a sovereign God who has the power to forgive debt, but also has to uphold the laws. In this metaphor, only a perfect sacrifice could satisfy the demands of the transgressed laws, and Jesus, being both God and man, was this perfect sacrifice. A slight variation of this is the Protestant “penal substitution theory,” which sees sin as the breaking of God’s moral law, and Jesus takes the punishment in the sinner’s stead.

– Moral Influence. A third metaphor from the 11th century, and speaks to the power of the image of a suffering Christ who sacrifices himself out of love for man, and mankind, moved by the extent of God’s love is transformed and healed by the power of the Holy Spirit.

– Theosis Metaphor. Eastern Orthodoxy views the atonement as not a legal release, but a transformation of the human nature itself in the Son taking on human nature. The Orthodox emphasis is that Christ died to change people so that they may become more like God.

As members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we expand on these metaphors by recognizing and emphasizing some additional components to the atonement:

– Christ’s suffering in Gethsemane. Modern day revelation in the Doctrine and Covenants adds emphasis to the role of Gethsemane in the atonement process: “…how sore you know not, how exquisite you know not, yea, how hard to bear you know not…. Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit…”

– Empathetic purpose. Christ did not only suffer for the sins of all men, but also to experience their physical pains, illnesses, anguish from addictions, emotional turmoil and depression, “that His bowels may be filled with mercy, according to the flesh, that he may know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities” (Alma 7:12; compare Isaiah 53:4). This empathy allows Jesus to be a more effective advocate and personal friend to us.

– The relationship between justice, mercy, agency, and God’s unconditional love. We focus on the need for free agency. Just as Jesus had the ability to choose to lay down his life, if we are truly penitent we will voluntarily come unto him to receive his grace. We do this through the process of repentance.

So, what are your thoughts on the atonement? Do you find it comforting? Does it bug you? Discuss.

[Anonymous]

I’m partial to the Theosis metaphor as it seems to embody more of what I hope Christ was doing in assuming mortality. Along with that I think it fits more easily with the concept of grace as a free gift and not something to be earned (after all we can do). When I was little I had this idea of a notebook in heaven with my name on it and everytime I did something bad there would be a black mark placed. I wondered over and over how many marks I could get before it would be too many and I wouldn’t be able to get into heaven. Penal substitution or Iguess the laws of justice and merch seemed to fit with that and since I’d always assumed that I’d never repent well enough I’ve gone through life feeling sort of doomed/not forgiven. With theosis it feels like a gift to me that’s unconditional and based on God’s wish for me to just be better, something a good parent would want for his/her children.

[Anonymous]

I also like Theosis, and the focus on becoming better rather than saved from eternal punishment. I like it that with Adam all die, and with Christ all are made alive, evening the score and then allowing the earthly experience be one where I need to practice faith and show what kind of choices I want to make and where my heart is.

I find it comforting. I find it gives me hope.

From there, it becomes fuzzy on how much grace will help me, and how much justice will grab me as I don’t live up to all the church standards I wish I could live up to.

[Anonymous]

Strange coincidence. I have been reading “Myths to Live By” by Joseph Campbell. I picked it up in a used bookstore last month. In particular, there is a chapter that discusses two paths in Japanese traditional religion:

1. “Tariki” or “outside strength.” They call this kitten faith — the image of a mother cat carrying a kitten in her mouth, gripping the kitten by the back of the neck, and carrying it to safety. This is associated more with the Jodo and Shinshu sects of Buddhism in Japan.

2. “Jiriki” or “own strength.” They call this monkey faith — the image of a baby monkey actively clutching the mother’s side or back as she jumps or climbs to safety. This is associated with Zen Buddhism in Japan.

Both are in relationship to release from the cycles of reincarnation, or in western terms, gaining Christian redemption.

Coming back to Hawkgrrl’s topic of the atonement. This speaks to different views. A Tariki perspective is traditional in Christianity. Our true nature is as a flawed beings, and we are raised up by a savior to holiness. We can not do this without divine help, thus we build a framework of personal relation to deity (Christ) in some way (aka the Atonement).

From a Jiriki perspective, one that we could choose to see ourselves as, and could have been the message of Christ is this — we are holy. That is our true nature! We have only forgotten it, and need to clear our minds and souls to see it — to be it. That’s appealing to me personally in a lot of ways. It’s very positive. Grab on to Christ and the message of the atonement. See clearly again. See that you are really OK.

Personally, it solves a lot of intellectual problems for me. In particular, issues like Theodicy (the question of evil in the world) and also problems of why God would make people that are flawed and then demand they be perfect. Maybe he made perfect people, beings who forgot they were that way.

[Anonymous]

I really like that many views of the Atonement exist among the membership of the LDS Church – including among the apostles and Prophets. Honestly, it’s one of the things that lets me believe it’s ok to see lots of things differently. Seriously, if we can view Jesus and the Atonement in different ways, I think it’s safe to view pretty much anything else in different ways. :geek:

I personally take bits and pieces of pretty much all of them – since I think they represent various views from different angles and types of lens.

I view the Atonement as an eternal process rather than a finite event or series of events. I see it as the underlying Truth that animates the entire reason for our existence as self-aware beings – the very nature of our existence, if you will. To me, the Atonement is the perfect (whole, complete, fully developed) plan that takes spiritual stuff and allow it to evolve into gods. It is an eternal round in which we participate – without beginning and without end.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

– that it creates a religion of losers, appealing to the down-and-outers. Dennis Miller once observed that the prison inmates always seem to find Jesus when no one else down here will talk to them anymore.

I don’t see that as a bad thing. Sometimes they end up saved in more ways than one. Jesus came for whores and thiefs as much as the rich and righteous. I’ve always seen that as a positive aspect of Christianity.

I tend to think the three bits you mention at the end are followed by other churches. Particularly the idea of Jesus emphathizing with humans.

There was one thing that you didn’t cover, and I’m surprised you didn’t mention it. Jesus was a human sacrifice. It’s no coincidence that he’s called the lamb in the Bible. Or… that he’s called the shepherd.

[img]http://reformedrevelry.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/ecceagnusdei.jpg[/img]

Isaiah 65:25 “The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent’s meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the LORD.”

According to orthodox (not Orthodox ) forms of Christianity, Jesus is referred to as the lamb, and we also hear the phrase “Lion of Judah” in reference to God (so beloved of Rastafarians). Interestingly, the serpent is seen as the Devil, and the wolf often as the imposter (wolves in sheep’s clothing) or the predator in the flock.

[Author]

Posts