The Simple Pastor

By Phil Whittall, church planter, blogger & book reviewer

Archive of "atonement" Category

• The most repugnant idea ever

  December 25, 2010 // 5 Comments »

  Christmas has been tamed but at its heart it is scandalous, shocking and offensive. I’ll let Richard Dawkins explain why. Dawkins was (over) reacting to the Pope’s Thought for the Day on the BBC yesterday.

  “(this is)…the centrepiece of what Ratzinger actually did say in his Thought for the Day. ‘Christ destroyed death forever and restored life by means of his shameful death on the Cross.’ More shameful than the death itself is the Christian theory that it was necessary. It was necessary because all humans are born in sin.”

  Absolutely, Christians believe that humanity is riddled inescapably with sin. Dawkins on the other hand resents the notion.

  “That sin, with which every newborn baby is hideously stained (another charming notion), was so terrible that it could be forgiven only through the blood sacrifice of a scapegoat. But no ordinary scapegoat would do. The sin of humanity was so great that the only adequate sacrificial victim was God himself.

  That’s right. The creator of the universe, sublime inventor of mathematics, of relativistic space-time, of quarks and quanta, of life itself, Almighty God, who reads our every thought and hears our every prayer, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent God couldn’t think of a better way to forgive us than to have himself tortured and executed. For heaven’s sake, if he wanted to forgive us, why didn’t he just forgive us? Who, after all, needed to be impressed by the blood and the agony? Nobody but himself.”

  Dawkins forgets completely about justice, refuses to think sin is all that serious, offensive or destructive. He fails to see in the cross God’s condemnation of sin, abhorrence of sin and rejection of sin because there is no price that needs paying. He’s God he can just let us off right? And so Dawkins fails to see the need for repentance and therefore of redemption. He misses the totality of forgiveness.

  Dawkins sums up his feelings about the heart of the Christian faith, forget science, forget the creation of the universe, this is the key:

  “But he [the Pope] is also guilty of promoting one of the most repugnant ideas ever to occur to a human mind: “Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Hebrews 9:22).”

  Sadly I don’t think Richard Dawkins would appreciate 1 Corinthians 1:18-31 but it’s what he needs to know.

  At Christmas I’ll gladly stand up and promote, even boast in such repugnance. Not that I think it occurred to a human mind but instead began in the heart of God. Sin is costly, it is deadly, it is death. Sin is repugnant, repulsive and rancid. Frankly I need to be see that or I’d be complacent and reckless, and I’m grateful that someone stood in my place on the cross because when I stand in front of God in His place I’ll know I’m not out of place.

  At Christmas we celebrate not just a birth but grace coming in human form, we celebrate salvation from repugnance. Merry Christmas.

  Categories:
  atonement, christmas, Jesus, salvation, Sin

• This empty tomb

  April 4, 2010 // 1 Comment »

  Friday was the day of the heavy cross, but that was only Friday and today is Sunday. Today there is an empty cross but that is not the good news. The good news is that today there is an empty tomb. Jesus has risen.

  I’m glad (in some ways) that the world chooses to largely ignore Easter and go shopping, because at least then we don’t face the same secularising effects that we have at Christmas, but in other ways it mystifies me that so many would choose to ignore such an incredible and frankly unbeatable offer. Jesus is better than chocolate.

  Today is far more special to me than birthdays, anniversaries, holidays, and the mindless consumer-fest that is Christmas. Because of what happened on this day I received a new spirit, a new heart, a new family. Because of what happened on this day I received new life, new hope, a new future, a new direction, a new beginning. His victory over death means life to me.

  * Here is a round-up of some other Easter Sunday posts from bloggers I read that I couldn’t link in the post*

  • Dave Matthias is to the point on why today is different
  • Fittingly Delirious? are the soundtrack to this resurrection video
  • Adrian Warnock on how Jesus honoured women in the resurrection

  Categories:
  atonement, easter, Jesus, resurrection

• This heavy cross

  April 2, 2010 // 1 Comment »

  Today was one of new experiences for me. For the first time I took part in a walk of witness in my local area and for the first time I carried a cross. Over the course of an hour a good number of us from at least three churches walked, sang, read scripture and prayed.

  I’m not sure how effective the witness bit was in the sense that it was a residential area and no one in particular seemed to be paying much attention but it was witness – we were outside not inside the church for a start. And not everything needs to be effective to be important.

  It was also an uncomfortable experience, even though I don’t think anyone was watching – how strange to be carrying a cross, how strange to be singing, praying and just being there. I found when I paused to search my soul that I was a bit embarrassed, somewhat uncomfortable and awkward.

  I volunteered to carry the cross because I knew that carrying those heavy pieces of wood even for a short distance would put paid to the feelings of discomfort, awkwardness and embarrassment. As I carried the cross I reflected that a man who changed my life forever carried a cross in great pain, in great shame and as a great display for all to see. Bleeding, naked and reviled Jesus carried his cross. But because I know Jesus is alive not dead, I asked him for forgiveness for being so easily ashamed.

  As I thought about this some of the words from a song which always touches me deeply came to mind,

  “You asked your Son to carry this
  The heavy cross our weight of sin

  I love you Lord, I worship you
  Hope which was lost, now stands renewed
  I give my life to honour this
  The love of Christ, the saviour king”

  The wonder of Good Friday is precisely this, that the Father would ask the Son to die in the place of awkward, uncomfortable and embarrassed, sinful, shameful people so that those same awkward, uncomfortable and embarrassed, sinful, shameful people would have the opportunity of being friends not foes, family not strangers, saints not sinners. This is the love of Christ our Saviour King.

  Categories:
  atonement, easter, forgiveness, Jesus, shrewsbury

• It’s time to die

  March 16, 2010 // No Comments »

  My friend Simon Guillebaud does challenge better than anyone else I know. Watch this video to see what I mean.

  You can watch more of these videos here

  HT: Peter Ould

  Tags: simon guillebaud
  Categories:
  atonement, Burundi, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Jesus, video

• God punished Christ?

  November 25, 2008 // 1 Comment »

  As a result of Adrian Warnock posting again on the atonement I moved The Atonement Debate up my reading list.

  Since the debate began nearly four years ago I’ve found myself having some questions about how penal substitutionary atonement has been preached and explained. However I.Howard Marshall’s chapter ‘The Theology of the Atonement’ is excellent and I find myself in almost total agreement.

  However he says this,
  

  “It is not a case of God punishing Christ but of God in Christ taking on himself the sin and its penalty. Indeed, at some point the challenge needs to be issued: where are these evangelicals who say that God punished Christ? Name them! Where are the evangelicals who will repudiate this statement, written by John Calvin: ‘We do not, however, insinuate that God was ever hostile to him or angry with him.’ You will not find them amongst serious theologians, although I recognise that popular preachers may err in this respect.” (p63)

  Hmm, I’m pretty sure some popular preachers have erred.

  Categories:
  atonement

• Atonement Debate: Again

  November 24, 2008 // 3 Comments »

  Last year, June or July 07, when Adrian Warnock’s blog had comments, it was a centre for debate on the Atonement, which had begun in reaction to Steve Chalke’s Lost Message of Jesus.

  Then things went quiet and the blog debates moved onto other things. Now Adrian has again started posting on the atonement and attacking Steve Chalke’s views as expressed in this book. Although this time, his blog can’t be a centre for debate as there’s no opportunity for comments but it is as you would expect gaining a response elsewhere.

  At the time I posted more comments on Adrian’s blog than I did on my own, but I did manage a couple of posts.

  • Here I reviewed Pierced for our Transgressions which has become a key book defending Penal Substitutionary Atonement (PSA), the view Adrian holds and Steve Chalke doesn’t. I mention some of my reservations, which I admit I need to do some more work on.
  • I did do some more thinking on the ‘Cup of Wrath’
  • Oh and I reviewed this great book on forgiveness by Miroslav Volf which I think shows the nature of forgiveness really well.

  And that was about it until I was called out by Dave Warnock although, this was about the outworkings of our theology, can we disagree on the aspects of the atonement and still work together? I think we can. For others not holding to PSA is not the Gospel and if its not the Gospel its heresy, dangerous and should be avoided. Beware false teachers.

  I’ve been meaning to post on some of my discussions about the atonement for some time, so as I do some more reading I’ll probably put some posts up. If you’d be interested in some of that debate happening here on this blog, let me know.

  Categories:
  atonement

• Book Review: Free of Charge

  July 15, 2008 // No Comments »

  Miroslav Volf’s Free of Charge: Giving and Forgiving in a Culture Stripped of Grace is an excellent book.

  Forgiveness is such a tough issue to both understand and more importantly to practice. There are so many emotional barriers that we struggle with and as a pastor I see people still bound to the hurt that they have received, still trapped by their offender because forgiveness hasn’t yet been found.

  Volf does not shirk the difficult issues, his examples are as heart rending as any – a father forgiving the sniper who shot his 3 year old daughter while she was playing – a mother forgiving the man who was with her son when his head was crushed in an accident – real stories of pain and hurt. Our lofty ideas of forgiveness need to be earthed in the reality of human pain and misery.

  His main influences in this book is Paul and Luther and so Volf draws on the riches of their thought. Volf argues that we give because God is a giver and He gives to us so that we can pass on to others, we forgive because God forgives and our forgiveness needs passing on.

  It has helped me think about how I explain forgiveness, by describing how forgiveness includes accusation. By saying I forgive, is to say ‘you have wronged me’ so forgiveness does not ignore the wrong. It has helped me in seeing how repentance is essential in making forgiveness complete. If I repent, I see the accusation of wrong as correct and I do something about it. If I refuse to accept the accusation I also refuse to receive the forgiveness offered. While the forgiver has forgiven the one in need of forgiveness remains unforgiven because repentance has not followed.

  Volf describes well for me how Christ takes my place and seems to me to do an excellent job of describing the importance of our union with Christ, and balancing wrath, justice, satisfaction and God’s love. As he says: “You can sum up where we’ve landed in four simple sentences. The world is sinful. That’s why God doesn’t affirm it indiscriminately. God loves the world. That’s why God doesn’t punish it in justice. What does God do with this double bind? God forgives.”

  It is both spiritual and theological, it is neither dry nor academic. It isn’t a straight forward read in that it does demand thoughtful engagement, how else can you think about forgiving others and being forgiven by God? But I would heartily recommend this book.
  

  Categories:
  atonement, book review, forgiveness, grace

• Bonhoeffer: on the cross

  April 1, 2008 // No Comments »

  “The cross is laid on every Christian. The first Christ-suffering which every person must experience is the call to abandon the attachments of this world. It is the dying of the old person which is the result of our encounter with Christ. As we embark upon discipleship we surrender ourselves to Christ in union with his death – we give over our lives to death.”

  This is quite different from many altar calls I have heard. ‘You have sinned, God can forgive you – be guilt free’ but what Bonhoeffer is saying, which I think is more biblical is that to follow Christ is to die to the old self, not just it’s sinfulness but also it’s attachments. In light of our consumerist disease that may mean the new kitchen, the upgraded car, the luxury holiday, the promotion to pay for it all, the retirement plans and all our wants and desires for newer, better, more may just have to wait. Before that comes seeking first, the kingdom and righteousness.
  I’m attached to new stuff, I quite like it. Nothing wrong with it but maybe I’m called to give up the desire for that and if I need it, I’ll trust God to provide for what I need and not what I want.

  Categories:
  atonement, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, discipleship, Jesus

• The Simple Pastor reaches first milestone

  January 2, 2008 // 1 Comment »

  It occurred to me today that I’ve been actively blogging for a while now and it turns out that I started this blog on the 18th December 2006. So The Simple Pastor has turned one and I didn’t even realise, which isn’t unusual when it comes to me and birthdays, they often go unnoticed until after the event.

  On the whole I would say it’s been a positive development in my life, it’s given me a creative outlet as well as a positive use of the internet, it’s introduced me to new people and conversations, opportunities and ideas. I’ve enjoyed the discipline of regularly writing and updating and enjoyed the comments that I get. Thank to you everyone who has read this and especially those of you who have taken the time to leave a comment, it was really appreciated.

  Adrian Warnock has (probably unknown to him) provided a fair share of this either with blogger tips (he’s been doing it for 5 years now) or debate. In particular the debate that occurred on his blog on the atonement (sadly it’s gone now since he removed comments from his blog although I think Peter Kirk saved them on his blog somewhere) was very thought provoking and I joined in a number of times. For me having grown up with Penal Substitutionary Atonement and belonging to the same church family as Adrian which wholeheartedly holds this view, it was somewhat unsettling to feel uneasy about the way some aspects have been presented and it caused me to go back to Scriptures (always good) and think afresh. I’m still working on the fruits of that labour. Over the year I’ve become the 37th leading referrer to his site which may indicate how often I’ve looked at his blog more than anything else.

  Jeremy over at Make Wealth History writes an excellent blog and in so many ways does what I had hoped to do only he does it better. If you want provoking insight into our currently unsustainable lifestyles and ways to change that then reading his blog is a must. I always read his blog and regularly add his posts to the headline sidebar.

  Matt Hosier is a new entrant to the world of blogging but if he keeps it up then you’ll get a diverse and thoughtful perspective on many issues of faith and life.

  There are others but those are blog friends and regular bloggers, so I’m looking forward to the journey continuing. No doubt I’ll change the look again, I’m already feeling restless…

  Categories:
  atonement, blogging

• The Cup of Wrath

  September 18, 2007 // No Comments »

  *Warning – Theological post*

  
  

  Ever since the whole atonement debate kicked off in evangelical circles, a few things about it have troubled me. Since reading Pierced for our Transgressions they’ve troubled me some more. One aspect of it is how people answer this question, ‘what was the cup Jesus was referring to in the garden of gethsemane?’ – Those who follow the penal substitution view see it as a reference to the cup of wrath that is mentioned a half dozen times in the OT. I’m not so sure but I was challenged by a friend to be a little more specific. So here are some tentative conclusions:

  
  

  I agree that the majority of OT references to cup are connected with wrath, judgment, or of suffering -“ Rev 14/10 a clear reference back to Jeremiah 25:15 – although not all references are connected to wrath so Ps 16/5; Ps 23/5; Ps 116/13 (but these are admittedly a minority)

  
  

  What is less clear to me is that it is clear exegetically that Jesus is referring to the cup of wrath at all, certainly none of the relevant cup of wrath passages link to Christ so is Christ linking to them -“ are we reading wrath into or out of the passage?

  
  

  Here are my reasons for doubt: Jesus says James & John will also drink of the same cup so while it might be suffering or death that Jesus is referring to, it can’t mean they bore God’s wrath.

  
  

  Secondly Paul in 1 Cor 10 makes the connection between the ‘˜cup of thanksgiving’™ and Christ’™s blood which is of course the direct context before Gethsemane, Jesus instituting the cup of the new covenant in his blood. That cup while involving Christ’s death isn’t a cup of wrath (at least not primarily) but of redemption and reconciliation.

  
  

  So I think the cup Jesus is referring to relates to the Passover (see the first half of this article by Scott Hahn although others also make the same case) and Jesus as the Passover lamb. If Jesus passed round the third cup as seems likely that is the cup linked with redemption or interestingly for NT Wright linked with exile. Anyway I think that is the more exegetically robust option. 

  
  

  This doesn’t or shouldn’t undermine the basis of penal substitution by the way. 

  Categories:
  atonement, Theology

• Absent again

  August 29, 2007 // No Comments »

  I’ve been getting ready for our church’s biggest ever outreach which starts tomorrow so I’ve been a bit busy and I guess will be a bit busy until next week. I’ll post some stuff if I get the chance about how things go, but we’re looking to raise the profile of the church, proclaim the good news about Jesus, pray for the sick and trust God for salvation and healings.

  In the meantime I’ve been debating with another pastor about the nature of forgiveness (more on that soon) and the nature of election, check out the comments from this post over at Adrian Warnock’s blog.

  I’ve also finished a book on Happiness which I’ll review soon, so if anyone does read this, please come back soon!

  Categories:
  atonement, forgiveness, hope church

• Book Review: Pierced for our Transgressions

  August 14, 2007 // 1 Comment »

  This is my 100th Post on this blog! What better way to celebrate than a discussion of the cross and as always something for us to argue about! *Warning* The rest of the post is a bit theological/boring depending on your point of view

  The death and resurrection of Jesus is the most important doctrine in our faith and that is why the temperature rises on this more than anything else, more ‘lines in the sand’ are drawn here than anywhere else.

  The authors of ‘Pierced for our Transgressions‘ (PFOT), reviewed, then interviewed and endlessly debated over at Adrian Warnock’s blog, have certainly drawn their lines in the sand on this issue. For them the Penal Substitution Atonement (PSA) view and in the way they view it is a line that cannot be crossed. Disagree on this and you may be in danger of preaching another gospel. For these guys the stakes are at their highest.

  I was expecting to really dislike this book but credit where it’s due, the authors have written a thorough, readable and engaging book. They’ve attempted to deal with their critics and largely the tone is open rather than defensive. What was hugely irritating though was the impression that ‘this is the last word’ on the subject, which just wound me up, what can I say?

  Anyway, for what it’s worth here are some things I disagreed with see what you think:

  1. This is one of the big ones. When answering their critics they find themselves relying on the doctrine of limited atonement to defend their views (p268-278). They admit that without this they ‘struggle to see how the criticisms can be answered’. To me the idea that God has two wills, God’s moral will, which He tells us about (‘I want to save everyone’) and His sovereign will, which He keeps to Himself (‘I’ll only save some’) is unbiblical, but is easily solved by allowing mankind real freedom of choice. Anyway pull the rug under this one and a lot of their other arguments fall.
  2. They provide good evidence that the wrath of God on the last day can be averted by faith in Christ but provide poor evidence (other than Is 53) to suggest that Christ bore that wrath ie that God actively poured out His wrath and anger on His Son who was hanging on the cross. These guys really, really like wrath. Anyway I’m uncomfortable with them being clearer on this than the writers of the New Testament.
  3. The resurrection is a bit more important than they make out – without it we would still be dead in our sins (1 Cor 15/17).
  4. The ‘cup’ Jesus referred to may not necessarily be that of wrath, there are other options
  5. The link between wrath and sacrifice is not proven which undermines a massive part of their theory
  6. We need to forgive without satisfaction, God needs satisfaction before He can forgive. Eh?

  And I could go on but we should be able to bash this one around for a while. I should point out that I believe Jesus was my substitute on the cross, he offered himself as a perfect sacrifice, is the great High Priest, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, did what I could not do, paid a price I was unable to pay, by faith alone in this can I be saved and forgiven and avoid God’s eternal judgement.

  On the cross Christ defeated sin, death, the devil and all evil. Therefore God exalted Him to the Highest Place. Sadly despite all of this because of the disagreements above I may be believing a false gospel. It’s this lack of nuance in PFOT that is hard to swallow, we’re right (100%) and anything else is just wrong.

  Categories:
  atonement, blogging, book review

• Debating the Atonement

  June 14, 2007 // No Comments »

  For many evangelical Christians, a debate has been taking place over our understanding of what and perhaps more specifically how Christ achieved for us forgiveness from sin and a restored relationship with God. I’ve been posting on Adrian Warnock’s blog so although that debate isn’t really the focus of my blog here, if you’re interested head there.

  Categories:
  atonement, blogging, Jesus