What is your understanding of God, Jesus, the Atonement?

[dms1972]

Certainly the priority of grace is Augustinian. But Augustine also had a commitment to predestination that Ottati doesn't exactly share. However the major characteristic of the book is that it reviews the major alternatives on issues, criticizes all of them, and adopts a set of statements that he thinks are well justified, rather than any of the specific theories that he reviews. This is the sort of approach that was taken by Nicea, which didn't define a complete theology of the Trinity, but adopted a set of statements that set boundaries within which discussion should occur. Even Chalcedon should probably be understand as that kind of thing applied to the Incarnation. (However from a historical point of view it was less successful, because there were other reasonable ways to talk about the Incarnation, and the Church was never able to manage the conflict with people holding those views.)

I don't think Ottati's final statements are the only value to the book. His review and assessments of the major alternatives is also really helpful. I shouldn't give the impression that he treats them all equally. Some he's willing to accept with appropriate qualification.

Would you be interested in doing a review of it for the site sometime?

 

[hedrick]

Neo-protestant theology was what Barth arrayed himself against, for him it was associated with Schleiermacher, Ritschl, Hermann, Troeltsch, and also Bultmann and Tillich.

Barth was upset at the German liberal church because it gave into Hitler. But viewed more broadly I think Barth is part of the same liberal tradition that he rejected. Nor is there anything inherent in liberal Christianity that makes is more likely to accept abusive states. In much of the world, e.g. the US and Latin America, it's liberal Christianity that has deployed the prophetic tradition against the State. My reading is that there was a specific issue in Germany, but the same theological tradition elsewhere in the world hasn't had the same problem.

 

[dms1972]

What liberals tend to reject is anything suggesting that God is the target of the atonement, i.e. that he needs Christ's death in order to forgive, whether because of his honor or his justice. Personally, I reject it because it contradicts Jesus' teachings about God.

This is a issue I struggle with, knowing a bit about both liberal and fundamentalist views. In the parable of the prodigal son, there doesn't seem to be any reference to the penal substitutionary atonement. But on the the other hand John the Baptist said things like: "you brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?" Luke 3:7, to some of the Pharisees coming for baptism. Also Paul speaks of christians having previously been "children of wrath". This idea of "flee from the wrath to come" is of course is prominent in the Puritans (such as Bunyan, eg. Pilgrim's Progress) I think you can see it there in some of Johnathan Edward's sermons. I don't know all Calvin wrote (and would have to check his institutes), is it not present in his thought at all? Of course that there are preachers or groups who hold this view is not proof of it, unless one can show it from Scripture. I think the issue of the wrath of God and what it means needs careful treatment though.

 

[hedrick]

I think there's a difference in approach between John the Baptist and Jesus. However I don't see it affecting the atonement. John's message was "repent", not "someone needs to die for you."

"Child of wrath" would be a Semitic expression for someone who by their actions is subject to punishment, like "sons of disobedience" in v 2. (Cf Word commentary, but this one is obvious without consulting a commentary.) Again, the existence of punishment for evil doesn't really affect the issue of the atonement. There are several ways that can be dealt with: repentance would be the obvious one. At least for Christians, 1 Cor 3:12 shows a way in which God's wrath could be shown without damnation.

It's also worth noting that in Rom 9:22, Paul talks about God enduring some who are objects of wrath, but in 11:25-26 and 32 tells us the mystery that it is God's goal in the end to save all of Israel and in 11:32, "all".

 

[The Liturgist]

..

 

[SkyWriting]

Hi, I have read criticism of liberal theology occasionally from fundamentalists, and I am here to see what some liberals (theologically) actually do believe, if that is ok?

What Jesus taught about sin and redemption and forgiveness and sinners.
That's the liberal position.