The Substitutionary Atonement of Christ The whole idea of the biblical teaching on atonement as finding a common ground otherwise known as reconciliation with God and human race of course through Christ stands out among other pillars of our doctrine. Historical, several proposed models emphases this concept in different dimensions; I wish to share what I find fascinating about the substitutionary atonement of Christ by first embarking on a field trip on the various thoughts. I have particular enjoyed Anselm’s version of the “idea of satisfaction” claiming that since God alone could atone for sin, which humanity was under the obligation to pay, so therefore it was necessary for the God-man to pay the satisfaction price for human kind. Thus this satisfaction was made possible through the voluntary death of Christ for the sins of the world. The idea of “reparation, ransom, and expiation” didn’t quite sit well with my understanding of God’s nature. I do not wish to believe that God is a feudal lord and his justice is arbitrary. Abelard’s proposed moral influenced may appear to counter balance that of Anselm’s but utilized same idea as the price, sacrifice, merit, much more central to his theory is that divine love awakens human’s response of love. For Abelard, love is the motive, method and also the result of God’s redemption. I consider this approach a interesting, because “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends… John 15:13” for me this theory is so fascinating because of the power of love. According to Abelard, “love is the motive, method, and result” and understandably it’s the universal language, which is why all the universe is drawn to God, and the awareness of God’s right of ownership. It is not arbitrary, it is just spontaneity, it encumbers the sense of authentic community, spiritual fellowship, and a right relationship with God. This is awesome! There may be several other model of atonement but reading (“ God sending His Son as an offering for sin_ Rom 8:3”; “made Him, who knew no sin, to be sin for us_ 2Cor 5:21”;) and several other references makes sense of the substitutionary atonement. Christ death for the sinner makes it a vicarious death in that “while we were yet sinners_ Rom 5:8,9” meaning that as enemies of God’s grace, God himself stood condemned, (by taking upon himself the sins of the world and becoming sin for us!) and at the same time Justified in His substitutionary death. The substitutionary atonement brings God under trail, while moral influence justifies God’s motive. Praise the Lord!!!
The whole idea of the biblical teaching on atonement as finding a common ground otherwise known as reconciliation with God and human race of course through Christ stands out among other pillars of our doctrine. Historical, several proposed models emphases this concept in different dimensions; I have particular enjoyed Anselm’s version of the “idea of satisfaction” claiming that since God alone could atone for sin, which humanity was under the obligation to pay, so therefore it was necessary for the God-man to pay the satisfaction price for human kind. Thus this satisfaction was made possible through the voluntary death of Christ for the sins of the world. The idea of “reparation, ransom, and expiation” didn’t quite sit well with my understanding of God’s nature. I do not wish to believe that God is a feudal lord and his justice is arbitrary. Abelard’s proposed moral influenced may appear to counter balance that of Anselm’s but utilized same idea as the price, sacrifice, merit, much more central to his theory is that divine love awakens human’s response of love. For Abelard, love is the motive, method and also the result of God’s redemption. I consider this approach a interesting, because “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends… John 15:13” for me this theory is so fascinating because of the power of love. According to Abelard, “love is the motive, method, and result” and understandably it’s the universal language, which is why all the universe is drawn to God, and the awareness of God’s right of ownership. It is not arbitrary, it is just spontaneity, it encumbered the sense of authentic community, spiritual fellowship, and a right relationship with God. This is awesome! reading (“ God sending His Son as an offering for sin_ Rom 8:3”; “made Him, who knew no sin, to be sin for us_ 2Cor 5:21”;) and several other references makes sense of the substitutionary atonement. Christ death for the sinner makes it a vicarious death in that “while we were yet sinners_ Rom 5:8,9” meaning as enemies of God’s grace, God himself stood condemned, (by taking upon himself the sins of the world and becoming sin for us!) and at the same time Justified in His substitutionary death. The substitutionary atonement brings God under trail, while moral influence justifies God’s motive. Praise the Lord!!!
The Substitutionary Atonement of Christ Historical, several proposed models emphases this concept in different dimensions; I have particular enjoyed Anselm’s version of the “idea of satisfaction” claiming that since God alone could atone for sin, which humanity was under the obligation to pay, so therefore it was necessary for the God-man to pay the satisfaction price for human kind. Thus this satisfaction was made possible through the voluntary death of Christ for the sins of the world. The idea of “reparation, ransom, and expiation” didn’t quite sit well with my understanding of God’s nature. I do not wish to believe that God is a feudal lord and his justice is arbitrary. Abelard’s proposed moral influenced may appear to counter balance that of Anselm’s though utilized same idea as the price, sacrifice, merit, much more central to his theory is that divine love awakens human’s response of love. For Abelard, love is the motive, method and also the result of God’s redemption. I consider this approach a interesting, because “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends… John 15:13” According to Abelard, “love is the “motive, method, and result” and unarguably it’s a universal language, and the awareness of God’s right of ownership. It is not arbitrary, it is just spontaneity, it encumbered the sense of authentic community, spiritual fellowship, and a right relationship with God. This is awesome! reading (“ God sending His Son as an offering for sin_ Rom 8:3”; “made Him, who knew no sin, to be sin for us_ 2Cor 5:21”;) and several other references makes sense of the substitutionary atonement. Christ death for the sinner makes it a vicarious death in that “while we were yet sinners_ Rom 5:8,9” as enemies of God’s grace, God himself stood condemned, (by taking upon himself the sins of the world and becoming sin for us!) and at the same time Justified in His substitutionary death. The substitutionary atonement brings God under trail, while moral influence justifies God’s motive. Praise the Lord!!!
403 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 403 of 403The Substitutionary Atonement of Christ
The whole idea of the biblical teaching on atonement as finding a common ground otherwise known as reconciliation with God and human race of course through Christ stands out among other pillars of our doctrine. Historical, several proposed models emphases this concept in different dimensions; I wish to share what I find fascinating about the substitutionary atonement of Christ by first embarking on a field trip on the various thoughts. I have particular enjoyed Anselm’s version of the “idea of satisfaction” claiming that since God alone could atone for sin, which humanity was under the obligation to pay, so therefore it was necessary for the God-man to pay the satisfaction price for human kind. Thus this satisfaction was made possible through the voluntary death of Christ for the sins of the world. The idea of “reparation, ransom, and expiation” didn’t quite sit well with my understanding of God’s nature. I do not wish to believe that God is a feudal lord and his justice is arbitrary. Abelard’s proposed moral influenced may appear to counter balance that of Anselm’s but utilized same idea as the price, sacrifice, merit, much more central to his theory is that divine love awakens human’s response of love. For Abelard, love is the motive, method and also the result of God’s redemption. I consider this approach a interesting, because “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends… John 15:13” for me this theory is so fascinating because of the power of love. According to Abelard, “love is the motive, method, and result” and understandably it’s the universal language, which is why all the universe is drawn to God, and the awareness of God’s right of ownership. It is not arbitrary, it is just spontaneity, it encumbers the sense of authentic community, spiritual fellowship, and a right relationship with God. This is awesome! There may be several other model of atonement but reading (“ God sending His Son as an offering for sin_ Rom 8:3”; “made Him, who knew no sin, to be sin for us_ 2Cor 5:21”;) and several other references makes sense of the substitutionary atonement. Christ death for the sinner makes it a vicarious death in that “while we were yet sinners_ Rom 5:8,9” meaning that as enemies of God’s grace, God himself stood condemned, (by taking upon himself the sins of the world and becoming sin for us!) and at the same time Justified in His substitutionary death. The substitutionary atonement brings God under trail, while moral influence justifies God’s motive. Praise the Lord!!!
The whole idea of the biblical teaching on atonement as finding a common ground otherwise known as reconciliation with God and human race of course through Christ stands out among other pillars of our doctrine. Historical, several proposed models emphases this concept in different dimensions; I have particular enjoyed Anselm’s version of the “idea of satisfaction” claiming that since God alone could atone for sin, which humanity was under the obligation to pay, so therefore it was necessary for the God-man to pay the satisfaction price for human kind. Thus this satisfaction was made possible through the voluntary death of Christ for the sins of the world. The idea of “reparation, ransom, and expiation” didn’t quite sit well with my understanding of God’s nature. I do not wish to believe that God is a feudal lord and his justice is arbitrary. Abelard’s proposed moral influenced may appear to counter balance that of Anselm’s but utilized same idea as the price, sacrifice, merit, much more central to his theory is that divine love awakens human’s response of love. For Abelard, love is the motive, method and also the result of God’s redemption. I consider this approach a interesting, because “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends… John 15:13” for me this theory is so fascinating because of the power of love. According to Abelard, “love is the motive, method, and result” and understandably it’s the universal language, which is why all the universe is drawn to God, and the awareness of God’s right of ownership. It is not arbitrary, it is just spontaneity, it encumbered the sense of authentic community, spiritual fellowship, and a right relationship with God. This is awesome! reading (“ God sending His Son as an offering for sin_ Rom 8:3”; “made Him, who knew no sin, to be sin for us_ 2Cor 5:21”;) and several other references makes sense of the substitutionary atonement. Christ death for the sinner makes it a vicarious death in that “while we were yet sinners_ Rom 5:8,9” meaning as enemies of God’s grace, God himself stood condemned, (by taking upon himself the sins of the world and becoming sin for us!) and at the same time Justified in His substitutionary death. The substitutionary atonement brings God under trail, while moral influence justifies God’s motive. Praise the Lord!!!
The Substitutionary Atonement of Christ
Historical, several proposed models emphases this concept in different dimensions; I have particular enjoyed Anselm’s version of the “idea of satisfaction” claiming that since God alone could atone for sin, which humanity was under the obligation to pay, so therefore it was necessary for the God-man to pay the satisfaction price for human kind. Thus this satisfaction was made possible through the voluntary death of Christ for the sins of the world. The idea of “reparation, ransom, and expiation” didn’t quite sit well with my understanding of God’s nature. I do not wish to believe that God is a feudal lord and his justice is arbitrary. Abelard’s proposed moral influenced may appear to counter balance that of Anselm’s though utilized same idea as the price, sacrifice, merit, much more central to his theory is that divine love awakens human’s response of love. For Abelard, love is the motive, method and also the result of God’s redemption. I consider this approach a interesting, because “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends… John 15:13” According to Abelard, “love is the “motive, method, and result” and unarguably it’s a universal language, and the awareness of God’s right of ownership. It is not arbitrary, it is just spontaneity, it encumbered the sense of authentic community, spiritual fellowship, and a right relationship with God. This is awesome! reading (“ God sending His Son as an offering for sin_ Rom 8:3”; “made Him, who knew no sin, to be sin for us_ 2Cor 5:21”;) and several other references makes sense of the substitutionary atonement. Christ death for the sinner makes it a vicarious death in that “while we were yet sinners_ Rom 5:8,9” as enemies of God’s grace, God himself stood condemned, (by taking upon himself the sins of the world and becoming sin for us!) and at the same time Justified in His substitutionary death. The substitutionary atonement brings God under trail, while moral influence justifies God’s motive. Praise the Lord!!!
Post a Comment