Progressive Disenchantment Atonement

John Bauer said:

Please explain clearly and succinctly how this answers my question.

Click to expand...

The telos of disenchantment is the attainment of spiritual maturity: the capacity to employ imagination to reach into the Kingdom of God, as well as the ability to see through false, demonic mythologies and thus avoid becoming enchanted by them. This entails living meditatively and reflectively within the earthly Kingdom of God and is equivalent to salvation—pitching one's tent in the celestial Kingdom.

John Bauer said:

No, I asked if disenchantment is the telos (not about the telos of disenchantment). I am asking an eschatological question.

Click to expand...

Disenchantment relates to personal psychology and personal salvation, not to eschatology. When Paul speaks of "new creation," he means seeing the world anew as spiritually mature beings. It means entering the earthly Kingdom in the present, which is also the inner Kingdom. The eschatological Kingdom is not disenchanted at all, for there we commune with angels.

There's been considerable theological debate and critique of traditional atonement theories, particularly in recent decades. It's not uniform discontent, but rather an active, ongoing conversation with significant voices questioning whether any single theory adequately captures the biblical witness. Non-Western theologians have found Western theories insufficient or overly focused on legal/juridical categories that don't resonate universally.

Critics argue penal substitutionary atonement can portray God as wrathful or violent, or that it may inadvertently glorify suffering. There's also been a broader shift towards viewing the atonement through multiple lenses rather than insisting on one "correct" theory. Hans Boersma, Fleming Rutledge, and Scot McKnight, have argued for a "kaleidoscopic" view, suggesting different atonement theories illuminate different aspects of Christ's work and shouldn't be seen as mutually exclusive.

However, the kaleidoscopic view might be accused of dodging rather than answering difficult theological questions. When theories conflict, saying "it's all true somehow" can seem like intellectual evasion. If God does require penal satisfaction, that matters enormously for understanding divine justice. If he doesn't, that matters equally. The question can't be sidestepped by appeal to mystery.

After all, different theories lead to different spiritualities and ethics and may shape Christian life differently. Holding them all equally makes it unclear what the cross actually calls believers to. If the New Testament authors consistently present Christ's death in certain dominant terms, a kaleidoscope that treats all theories as equally valid may actually flatten the biblical witness rather than honour it.

Critics from more conservative positions sometimes see the kaleidoscopic approach as capitulating to postmodern relativism—a refusal to commit to truth claims in favour of an "everyone's right" pluralism.

Progressive Disenchantment Atonement, which could also be called Cosmic Disenchantment Theory, offers a promising solution to these tensions.

I have continued working on this model of atonement that integrates multiple soteriological frameworks through the lens of cosmic disenchantment and aligns Christ's redemptive work with the trajectory of secularization. This proposal is informed by the perspectives of Jean-Luc Nancy, Karl Barth, and Marcel Gauchet. Several theologians have argued that monotheism functions as a kind of atheism with respect to the natural world: by locating the divine exclusively in transcendence, Christianity drains the cosmos of inherent sacredness. Secularization thus appears not as the enemy of faith but as the liberation of nature from magical thinking and spiritual bondage. Yet this process carries significant dangers, including nihilism, moral corruption, hedonism, and political fanaticism.

Contemporary "theodramatic" theologies (e.g., Vanhoozer, Moes) attempt to "re-enchant" the world through renewed emphasis on divine immanence. However, treating the material world as the stage of divine drama risks a regression into pagan metaphysics, reminiscent of Egyptian ritual practices in which statues embodied deities. To clarify this distinction, the article differentiates between horizontal and vertical participation: the former reflects the pagan impulse to locate God within matter, while the latter directs believers toward the celestial Kingdom through mind and spirit.

The human psyche nevertheless retains an archaic, innate drive for participation and enchantment. When this "underground river" is obstructed by aggressive atheism or rigid theological rationalism, it tends to erupt in destructive forms: political religions such as Nazism or Communism, or contemporary conspiracy movements. Theology therefore plays an important role in illuminating these matters, while the Church and its sacraments perform an essential therapeutic function. They offer a structured and "safe" channel for humanity's participatory impulses, preventing nihilism while preserving the theological boundary between the earthly and the heavenly.

Ultimately, the article advocates a form of faith that acknowledges the emptiness of the material world yet redirects the human longing for the sacred toward a transcendent rather than immanent reality: From Enchantment to Transcendence: Christ's Work as Cosmic Disenchantment.

Discuss!

FireDragon76 said:

Have you read Tom Holland's book Dominion? He actually describes secularism as a kind of outworking of certain Christian categories into history. But in the end, he seems to be gesturing towards secularism having reached a state of aporia or impasse. This kind of liberation no longer upholds any notion of sovereignty in the old, Enlightenment sense. Instead we are left increasingly with fragmented selves without coherent narratives to our lives.

There is definitely an element of potential trickster logic in the Gospels. The parables, the post-Resurrection appearances, these are all the kinds of nonlinear vision logic or dream-logic that are familiar to indigenous cultures that still consider tricksters sources of profound wisdom. Still, I'd be cautious about flattening the meaning of the atonement to just one particular register. And the principalities and powers that were defeated are not necessarily demons in the medieval theological sense, but more like the archons, principalities or egregores of empire . Empire still exsists, but now something new has been manifested to the world that goes against the utilitarian logic of empire and that speaks to a higher, transcendent logic.

Click to expand...

I don't believe my model offers a flattened perspective. Rather than presenting a kaleidoscope of disparate atonement models, I view progressive disenchantment as a prism through which Christus Victor, satisfaction, substitution, moral influence, and the governmental dimension can all be refracted and understood in relation to one another.

I haven't read Holland's book, but I am aware that he interprets secularization as an outgrowth of Christianity itself.

I maintain that Paul's language about the principalities and powers must be understood as referring to demonic realities, even if earthly authorities can fall under their influence. This is essential to the kingdom model. The celestial kingdom is not a metaphor but a real domain, and it is the only true remedy for the darker consequences of secularization.

Without such a transcendent horizon, we should expect only further nihilism and corruption, to the point where our civilization risks collapse. The release of the Epstein files shows how deeply this corruption can run.