The atonement is essential: Part II

Last week

Desiring God: May 4, 2019: The Hill We All Must Die On: Four Questions to Ask About Atonement

Dr. Stephen Wellum was one of my theological advisers while I was attending Canadian Baptist Seminary/Trinity Western University, working on my MTS (Master of Theological Studies).

As my BA was within a Mennonite Brethren context and culture, and in Biblical Studies and not Theology, technically; Dr. Wellum assisted me with sources and knowledge in regards to Reformed theology and in particular, the work of John S. Feinberg, that was in the future, my key Reformed exemplar for my British MPhil/PhD theses.

I certainly had Reformed leanings while at Columbia Bible College for my BA, but waited until I earned my MPhil at Wales, before publicly embracing the term 'Reformed' for myself.

Online, I came across some of Dr. Wellum's recent work (italics). My work as is Dr. Wellum's, is non-exhaustive.

The Hill We All Must Die
On Four Questions to Ask About Atonement

By Dr. Stephen Wellum

Tuesday, February 18, 2020: The atonement is essential: Part I

Cited 

1. Who Is God?

First, we must get right who God is as our triune Creator-Covenant Lord. Mark it well: debates over the nature of the atonement are first and foremost doctrine of God debates. If our view of God is sub-biblical, we will never get the cross right. From the opening verses of Scripture, God is presented as eternal, a se (life from himself), holy love, righteous, and good — the triune God who is complete in himself and who needs nothing from us (Genesis 1–2; Psalm 50:12–14; Isaiah 6:1–3; Acts 17:24–25; Revelation 4:8–11). One crucial implication of this description is that God, in his very nature, is the moral standard of the universe. This is why we must not think of God’s law as something external to him that he may relax at will. Instead, the triune God of Scripture is the law; his will and nature determine what is right and wrong.
---

I agree that biblical theology in regards to the nature of atonement connects to biblical theology in regards to the nature of God. God's infinite, eternal, holy, perfectly moral, nature, requires any and all finite entities that would ever have everlasting life to ontologically (in regards to nature) possess a finite form of holiness and moral perfection. Genesis 3 from the Hebrew Bible, records the fall of humanity and the New Testament (Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, Hebrews, as examples) explains that the atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ is the divine remedy for that human fall.

From 2010 Theodicy and Practical Theology: PhD thesis, the University of Wales, Trinity Saint David, Lampeter 

Edited

I note the fall because Augustine describes a literal fall. Augustine (426)(1958: 254-255), and the corruption of humanity that led to the literal problem of evil. Augustine (426)(1958: 254-255). For many secular and Biblical scholars from mainline denominations, the Biblical story of the fall is likely fiction. Jackson (1941)(2006: 1). Fretheim (1994: 152). To Feinberg, human freedom and all human attributes had been tainted by the corruption of humanity in the fall. Feinberg (1994: 126-127). I discuss Genesis and the fall in Chapter Two of my PhD thesis and I am not convinced that all of the creation account must be taken plain literally in order to stay true to Scripture. Figurative literal approaches are possible at some points.

My British PhD work at Wales was required to be diverse in my discussion in regards to the fall.

February 24, 2020

Within my biblical, Reformed theology, I certainly view, based on Romans 5, as a key example, Jesus Christ, the God-man, as the last Adam, and therefore fully accept an actual, non-fictional, historical Adam and Eve. However, Genesis 1-3 allows for interpretations that can be figurative literal while rejecting mythology. In other words, a literal, historical Adam and Eve could be explained with both prose and poetry.

William Sanford La Sor, David Allan Hubbard, and Fredric William Bush (1987) from what I deduced was a moderate conservative, evangelical position, reason the author of Genesis is writing as an artist and storyteller who uses literary device. La Sor, Hubbard, and Bush (1987: 72). They point out it is imperative to distinguish which literary device is being used within the text of Genesis. La Sor, Hubbard, and Bush (1987: 72).

Romans 5 (New American Standard Bible)

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 for [h]until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a [i]type of Him who was to come. h. Romans 5:13 Or until law i. Romans 5:14 Or foreshadowing
---

I further agree with Dr. Wellum that God is the moral standard of the universe, his infinite, eternal, holy and perfect nature, makes it so. God's law and moral law especially, is a reflection of his divine nature, and therefore to live everlastingly within the future culminated Kingdom of God, atonement (and resurrection) is required for humanity corrupted within this present, temporary (Revelation 21-22) realm.

The Resurrection

1 Corinthians 15 (New American Standard Bible)

42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown [l]a perishable body, it is raised [m]an imperishable body; 43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 So also it is written, “The first man, Adam, became a living soul.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual. 47 The first man is from the earth, [n]earthy; the second man is from heaven. 48 As is the earthy, so also are those who are earthy; and as is the heavenly, so also are those who are heavenly. 49 Just as we have borne the image of the earthy, [o]we will also bear the image of the heavenly. l. 1 Corinthians 15:42 Lit in corruption m. 1 Corinthians 15:42 Lit in incorruption n. 1 Corinthians 15:47 Lit made of dust o. 1 Corinthians 15:49 Two early mss read let us also

50 Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does [p]the perishable inherit [q]the imperishable. p. 1 Corinthians 15:50 Lit corruption q. 1 Corinthians 15:50 Lit incorruption

Even with the use of philosophy of religion (examining religion philosophically), the first cause, the primary cause, that exists as necessary in any possible world, as of necessity would be, by ontological default, what is good and holy. Finite, contingent human beings, soiled and engulfed by moral imperfection and problems of evil would not be by nature fit for everlasting life in the presence of such an entity. Reasonably within a type of theistic philosophy of religion, there is a fracture between humanity and God. Divine atonement is the fix. This makes reasonable sense to me primarily theologically (from the bible) and secondarily through philosophy of religion.

AUGUSTINE (398-399)(1992) Confessions, Translated by Henry Chadwick, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

AUGUSTINE (400-416)(1987)(2004) On the Trinity, Translated by Reverend Arthur West Haddan, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series One, Volume 3, Denver, The Catholic Encyclopedia. 

AUGUSTINE (421)(1998) Enchiridion, Translated by J.F. Shaw, Denver, The Catholic Encyclopedia. AUGUSTINE (426)(1958) The City of God, Translated by Gerald G. Walsh, Garden City, New York, Image Books.

AUGUSTINE (427)(1997) On Christian Doctrine, Translated by D.W. Robertson Jr., Upper Saddle River, N.J., Prentice Hall.

AUGUSTINE (427b)(1997) On Christian Teaching, Translated by R.P.H. Green, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

FEINBERG, JOHN S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (2001) No One Like Him, John S. Feinberg (gen.ed.), Wheaton, Illinois, Crossway Books.

FRETHEIM, TERENCE E. (1985)(2005) ‘The Suffering of God: An Old Testament Perspective’, in Theology Today, Volume 1, Number 1, Bookreview17. Princeton, Princeton Theological Seminary. http://theologytoday.ptsem.edu/apr1985/v42-1-bookreview17.htm 

JACKSON, JOHN G. (1941)(2006) Pagan Origins of the Christ Myth, New York, Truth Seeker Co. http://www.nbufront.org/html/MastersMuseums/JGJackson/ChristMyth/ChristMythPart1.html

LA SOR, WILLIAM SANFORD, DAVID ALLAN HUBBARD, AND FREDERIC WILLIAM BUSH. (1987) Old Testament Survey, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

The atonement is essential: Part I

My first few years...

Desiring God: May 4, 2019: The Hill We All Must Die On: Four Questions to Ask About Atonement

Dr. Stephen Wellum was one of my theological advisers while I was attending Canadian Baptist Seminary/Trinity Western University, working on my MTS (Master of Theological Studies).

As my BA was within a Mennonite Brethren context and culture, and in Biblical Studies and not Theology, technically; Dr. Wellum assisted me with sources and knowledge in regards to Reformed theology and in particular, the work of John S. Feinberg, that was in the future, my key Reformed exemplar for my British MPhil/PhD theses.

I certainly had Reformed leanings while at Columbia Bible College for my BA, but waited until I earned my MPhil at Wales, before publicly embracing the term 'Reformed' for myself.

Online, I came across some of Dr. Wellum's recent work (italics). My work as is Dr. Wellum's, is non-exhaustive.

The Hill We All Must Die
On Four Questions to Ask About Atonement

By Dr. Stephen Wellum

Cited

The doctrine of penal substitution is under attack today — and that’s an understatement. From voices outside of evangelical theology to those within, the historic Reformation view of the cross is claimed to be a “modern” invention from the cultural West. Others criticize the doctrine as sanctioning violence, privileging divine retributive justice over God’s love, condoning a form of divine child abuse, reducing Scripture’s polychrome presentation of the cross to a lifeless monochrome, being too “legal” in orientation, and so on.

There are numerous critics of Reformed theology within the Christian Church, and critics of Biblical, Christian theology. My MPhil and PhD writing and questionnaire results (see website archives) demonstrated that significant aspects of Reformed theology were (and are) not embraced by the many evangelicals, liberals and others within Christendom, or if preferred, the Christian Community. Reformed theology certainly not embraced by critics outside of Christendom or the Christian Community.

(Christendom and the Christian Community, being those that confess a form of Christianity, not necessarily Biblical Christianity)

Penal substitution receives significant negative critique within and outside of the Church. But, this view that human sin breaks the law of God (Grenz, Guretzki, Nordling: 90), for which the penalty is death (90), therefore leading to the death of Jesus Christ for those chosen by God, to appease the law of God (90), is definitively and definitely biblical.

Atonement is a very complex theological issue and there are various perspectives from Biblical scholars. Millard J. Erickson explains that atonement theory is multifaceted including the concepts of sacrifice, propitiation (appeasement of God), substitution and reconciliation. (1994: 811-823).

Non-exhaustive, New Testament examples that support the theology of substitution within the atoning work of Jesus Christ:

Mark 10:45 English Standard Version

For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.

Jesus Christ's death is a ransom and substitution for the sinners through the atonement.

Romans 3:25 English Standard Version

Whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins.

Propitiation: The atonement offering that turns away God’s wrath. Christ’s atoning work serves as propitiation. Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (96).

Mounce explains in his Romans commentary that there is a debate whether propitiation, as in appeasing the wrath of God or expiation, the covering for sin, is a better translation. (116). He reasons that although the term 'propitiation' may not be the best translation, this Greek term is best reasoned as 'placating' God's wrath against sin. (117). This is also theologically connected to God's righteousness applied to those in Jesus Christ (118).

Cranfield writes that other meanings, other than 'mercy-seat' have been rejected in his text. (77). He reasons that the idea of propitiation is not excluded here and that 'propitiatory sacrifice' is a reasonable suggestion. (77).

Expiation v propitiation: March 24 2008

I have noted previously...

C.H. Dodd (also mentioned by Mounce and Cranfield) explains that the Greek word in Romans 3: 25 should be translated expiation and not propitiation, and claims that many Greek translations have been incorrect on this issue. Dodd (1935: 82-95).

Browning writes that propitiation is a means of warding off the just anger of God. He reasons that modern Biblical translations make it clear that the New Testament teaches that through Christ’s atoning work, expiation takes place, and an angry God is not appeased through the propitiation of Christ. Browning (1996: 305).

Anthony D. Palma explains that propitiation can be defined as the idea of appeasing God, while expiation means to atone for sin against God, as in offering or sacrifice. Palma (2007: 1). Palma explains that the New Testament idea of propitiation includes expiation, but expiation does not necessarily include the idea of propitiation. Palma (2007: 1).

Bible Hub

James Strong explains that the word discussed in Romans 3: 25, ἱλαστήριον (ilastērion), is defined as an expiatory place or thing, an atoning victim, mercyseat, and propitiation. Strong (1890)(1986: 48).

From Strong’s definition, Romans 3: 25 does allow for the idea of atonement in both the sense of sacrifice and appeasement. Strong (1890)(1986: 48). However, his definition does place more emphasis on expiation than propitiation in the atonement process in Romans 3: 25. Strong (1890)(1986: 48).

Walter Bauer explains that the meaning in Romans 3: 25 is uncertain and could be either expiates or propitiates. Bauer (1979: 375). For Strong the definition of the word from 1 John 2:2 and 4:10 is atonement, expiator, propitiation and so 1 John does not solve the issue from Romans. Strong (1890)(1986: 49).

Some within Christian traditions may reason that expiation is all that is needed within the atoning work of Christ, while others such as myself within Reformed traditions may conclude expiation and propitiation, both sacrifice and appeasement, are reasonable concepts within Christian atonement. It should be considered that any anger God would possess would be completely just, and not emotionally charged and prone to sin as human anger can be.

As well, both expiation and propitiation are legitimate tools to bring justice in God’s view, based on the New Testament. Expiation covers up and cancels the human sin against God, while propitiation deals with the righteous wrath of God, as he has been unjustly wronged.

God's wrath against humanity was atoned and substituted for by the atoning work of Jesus Christ with his death on the cross.

Romans 5:8 English Standard Version

But God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

The substitutionary nature of God's atonement through Jesus Christ, demonstrates divine love for humanity that is in Jesus Christ through grace through faith.

2 Corinthians 5:21 English Standard Version

For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

Christ's applied atoning work to those chosen, Ephesians 1-2, Roman 8-9, imputes the righteousness of Jesus Christ to those believers that are therefore justified.

Hebrews 2:17 English Standard Version

Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.

Jesus Christ as incarnate infinite God and perfect human being, serves as high priest and the source of atonement for his people.

1 John 2:2 English Standard Version

He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.

In other words, all national and ethnic groups. This is not teaching universalism.

Dr. Stephen Wellum

Cited

All of these charges are not new. All of them have been argued since the end of the 16th century, and all of them are false. Yet such charges reflect the corrosive effects of false ideas on theology and a failure to account for how the Bible, on its own terms, interprets the cross. Given the limitations of this article, I cannot fully respond to these charges. Instead, I will briefly state four truths that unpack the biblical-theological rationale of penal substitution. In so doing, my goal is to explain why penal substitution should be embraced as God’s good news for sinners.

End Part 1

BAUER, WALTER. (1979) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Translated by Eric H. Wahlstrom, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.

BROWNING, W.R.F. (1997) ‘Propitiation' in Oxford Dictionary of the Bible, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

CRANFIELD, C.E.B. (1992) Romans: A Shorter Commentary, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

DODD. C.H. (1935) The Bible and the Greeks, London, Hodder and Stoughton.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

FEINBERG, JOHN S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

GRENZ, STANLEY J., DAVID GURETZKI AND CHERITH FEE NORDLING (1999) Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, Downers Grove, Ill., InterVarsity Press.

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1995) The New American Commentary: Romans, Nashville, Broadman & Holman Publishers.

PALMA, ANTHONY (2007) ‘Propitiation’ in Enrichment Journal, Springfield Missouri, Enrichment Journal. http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/top/Easter_2007/2007_Propitiation .pdf

STRONG, J. (1890)(1986) Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Pickering, Ontario, Welch Publishing Company.

Genetic Fallacy/Damning The Origin/Damning The Source II

Venice: trekearth: Bridge of sighs

Genetic Fallacy/Damning The Origin/Damning The Source: February 4 2016

Edited from the archived 2016 article

PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.

Pirie: 'The genetic fallacy has nothing to do with Darwin'... (116) But a great deal to do with not liking where an argument comes from. (116). People give less credence to views which emanate from those they detest, regardless of the actual merit of the views themselves. (116). To dismiss an argument based on source alone is to commit the genetic fallacy. (116) Genetic fallacy is sometimes also known as 'damning the origin.' (116). 

'Damning the source' would work as well as a term. My add, having read this elsewhere previously.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

Philosopher Blackburn again, as with elsewhere in his text, uses the word 'alleged' in regard to the subject of fallacy and in this case genetic fallacy. 'The alleged mistake of arguing that something is to be rejected because of its suspicious origins.' (155). A useful entry for balance: 'More widely, any mistake of inferring something about the nature of some topic from a proposition about its origins. Frequently such reasoning is, actually quite appropriate, as when one uses the make of an automobile as an indicator of its likely quality.' (155).

February 13 2020

Four years on and I reason that for this fallacy (Pirie) or alleged fallacy (Blackburn) to be clearly avoided requires an objective analysis of premises and conclusions forming arguments. Arguments, regardless of the source, for the sake of truth, need to be reviewed for validity and soundness.

Philosophy Index

Cited

The term sound is most frequently used to describe whether or not an argument is valid and has true premises, thereby guaranteeing the truth of its conclusion. In meta-logic, it is also used to describe a feature of a logical system. Soundness of arguments:  An argument that is sound is one that is both valid, and has all true premises. 

Therefore, by definition, a sound argument has a true conclusion.

Back to Pirie

A valid argument can have a false premise. (69). As long as the premise (s) are not true and the conclusion false, it is logically possible to have a valid argument.

Premise-Conclusion TT, FF, FT, TF combinations.

A true premise (s) and false conclusion (TF) from these combinations, cannot possibly be logically valid. The other combinations are logically valid.

However, as Pire recognizes, a sound (true) argument has all true premises. (69). I am not placing a limit on the number of premises within every type of argument. The conclusion would also be true.

Quaternio terminorum: The fallacy of four: July 13 2017

University of Kentucky

Cited

argument 

An Argument is a group of statements including one or more premises and one and only one conclusion. The point of an argument is to give the receiver of the argument good reason to believe new information.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

CONWAY DAVID A. AND RONALD MUNSON (1997) The Elements of Reasoning, Wadsworth Publishing Company, New York.

PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.

Oxford: Political left-Political right (Non-exhaustive)

Via Google this is an edited photo of the
neighbourhood that I spent my first five years in.
The trees and houses bring back memories. One house is the
same colour still. We were at the end
right of this street, connecting to the avenue.
This perspective backwards was still forest when I lived there.
Not anymore.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

I like to mix things up somewhat with my writing and yet stay within my educated academic disciplines. I am not interested in speculating in ignorance.

Viewing and reading about recent political and economic protests in British Columbia, I thought I would quote Blackburn, a very good trusted secular source, in my humble opinion, on the worldview values of the political left and the political right. My work, God willing, remains within an objectively, non-heated approach. So much of what I read in today's western culture seems radicalized.

God has guided me to write rationally and reasonably in Jesus Christ, not to be radicalized.

We should consider that this entry from Blackburn was written in 1996...so there has been some evolution of concepts in 24 years.

I provide the information that I am politically and religiously a moderate conservative within a 2020 context.

Left (political)

'Most generally, any political stance which is for the poor, the oppressed and the underprivileged, and against the power, property, and privilege selectively conferred by class interests and established economic and social institutions.' (215)

Blackburn lists related ideas of anarchism, collectivism, Marxism, political rights, socialism. (215).

Being biblical in a New Testament context, requires one to acknowledge that God reasons that some rich abuse some poor.

James 5:1-6 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

5 Come now, you rich, weep and howl for your miseries which are coming upon you. 2 Your riches have rotted and your garments have become moth-eaten. 3 Your gold and your silver have rusted; and their rust will be a witness against you and will consume your flesh like fire. It is in the last days that you have stored up your treasure! 4 Behold, the pay of the laborers who mowed your fields, and which has been withheld by you, cries out against you; and the outcry of those who did the harvesting has reached the ears of the Lord of [a]Sabaoth. 5 You have lived luxuriously on the earth and led a life of wanton pleasure; you have [b]fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter. 6 You have condemned and [c]put to death the righteous man; he does not resist you.

Footnotes: a James 5:4 I.e. Hosts b James 5:5 Lit nourished c James 5:6 Or murdered
---

Wealth is not inherently wrong, but its misuse is...

Biblical Christians can theologically support reasonable church, government and private efforts to oppose the exploitation of the poor by the rich. Biblical Christians can likewise oppose all sorts of evil (s).

But, I view battling class interests and established economic and social institutions, and to what degrees, as less clear. These divisions can exist by abuse of the rich on the poor, and the abuse by the powerful on the weak, but then again, not always necessarily so.

We realize that some people work harder than others. A few do not wish to work at all.

2 Thessalonians 3: 10 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either.
---

Some people have more intelligence than others in regards to business and making money. Some people work smarter than others. Some people damage their bodies through substance abuse. Some people need social assistance due to health issues, born with and/or developed. I am not opposed to social assistance when needed.

There is the believers call to seek first the Kingdom...

Matthew 6:33 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

33 But [a]seek first [b]His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be [c]added to you.

Footnotes: Matthew 6:33 Or continually seek Matthew 6:33 Or the kingdom Matthew 6:33 Or provided

Luke 12:31 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

31 But seek His kingdom, and these things will be added to you.
---

The gospel call places a Christian regenerated life (Titus 3, John 3), being guided by the Holy Spirit, as taking great priority over any leanings toward a radical left wing, political agenda.

There are politically left points of truth and the biblical Christian needs to support the truth; but within a gospel mandate. My own bias is that for example, philosophically, opposing the exploitation of the poor or of the planet is not a left-wing issue, solely. I do not, for example, consider the pollution of oceans with plastic bags a solely left-wing issue. That is wrong and should be reasonably dealt with.

Right (political)

'The branch of political opinion that is for the freedom of the individual in economic matters, and therefore protects the distributions of property and divisions that such freedom generate.' (331).

Blackburn states that the right may be authoritarian. (331). Personally, I favour a moderate form of governments and societies which would be conservative-libertarian and allow for the political, worldview, religious and non-religious, freedoms and social assistance for those that truly need it.

As with the left, Blackburn writes that the right can also support anarchism, as well as the right supports conservatism, fascism, individualism. (331). The gospel call places a Christian regenerated life (Titus 3, John 3), being guided by the Holy Spirit, as taking great priority over any leanings toward a radical right wing, political agenda.
---

In the current British Columbia news context, I do not support political protests that do not obey law and order (via the state). Romans 13 (1 Peter 2) commands the believer to obey law and order. If a Christian was to disobey the law for the sake of maintaining biblical faith, it should not take place in a disruptive protesting manner. As much as it is up to us, be at peace with everyone (Romans 12: 8).