AUTHOR: David Marshall

Angles of the Cross: Part Two

In part one of this article, I tried to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of three of the major atonement models: the Christus Victor approach, Anselm’s satisfaction model, and moral exemplarism. What follows is my attempt to synthesize all three by discussing them in the context of several important theological ideas: sin, the Incarnation, and the Cross.

Topic One: Sin

Without sin, there would be no need to discuss atonement in a Christian context. However, there are two extremes it is often relegated to: the idea that sin is “simply a legal claim,”1Hans Boersma, Violence, Hospitality, and the Cross: Reappropriating the Atonement Tradition (Grand Rapics: Baker Academic, 2004), 184. which is often espoused (both consciously and subconsciously) by those who hold to a more objective view, or the belief that when one is saved from sin, these sins have more to do with sinning against others and sins “committed through social institutions.”2Miguel De la Torre, Doing Christian Ethics from the Margins (2nd ed.; Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 2014), 35. The problem here is both approaches have merit: sin is so much more than simply “offending” God, yet the effect of sin on humanity’s standing before God required something to happen as a result. Not recognizing the truth in both extremes leaves one with an imbalanced view of sin.

References   [ + ]

1. Hans Boersma, Violence, Hospitality, and the Cross: Reappropriating the Atonement Tradition (Grand Rapics: Baker Academic, 2004), 184.
2. Miguel De la Torre, Doing Christian Ethics from the Margins (2nd ed.; Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 2014), 35.

Angles of the Cross: Part One

Due to the nature of the topic, the church universal has yet to formulate a unified doctrine of the atonement. This article, written in light of the Anabaptist tradition where multiple atonement models have oftentimes been held in tandem,1Frances F. Hiebert, “The Atonement in Anabaptist Theology,” Direction 30, no. 2 (Fall 2001), http://www.directionjournal.org/30/2/atonement-in-anabaptist-theology.html#Note15 (accessed August 15, 2016), 132. argues that three of the more popular models of the atonement (Christus Victor, satisfaction, and moral exemplar) can indeed be viewed as being complementary and mutually beneficial, despite those who would say otherwise. Part one will briefly review each model, including several critical remarks, followed by a short section detailing some of the initial concerns with this approach. Part two will deal with three topics in the context of the atonement (sin, the Incarnation, and cross) and how the aforementioned models can be utilized cohesively alongside one another.2This article was originally a paper written for CH503: The Church’s Understanding of Church, Humanity, and Christian Life in Its Theological Reflection; Fuller Theological Seminary, Summer Quarter 2016.

References   [ + ]

1. Frances F. Hiebert, “The Atonement in Anabaptist Theology,” Direction 30, no. 2 (Fall 2001), http://www.directionjournal.org/30/2/atonement-in-anabaptist-theology.html#Note15 (accessed August 15, 2016), 132.
2. This article was originally a paper written for CH503: The Church’s Understanding of Church, Humanity, and Christian Life in Its Theological Reflection; Fuller Theological Seminary, Summer Quarter 2016.

Nineveh and Enemy Love

Even though I was living in small town Pleasant Hill, Missouri, rather than New York, 9/11 was a scary day for me and my family. Before I knew it, I was told my dad was not allowed to leave the air force base he was stationed at, since they were a potential target for future attacks. The thought of my dad being stuck on base while our country was under attack, let alone not coming home alive, was paralyzing for a 7th grader. Nothing may have happened, but it remains a haunting thought to this day, and it caused me to become skeptical of anyone I met who might…well, you know…be a “terrorist.”

Fast forward a few years later, and the same fear that gripped us as a nation then still lurks in the corner (or sometimes forefront) of our minds now. This is why Trump gets so much support for his ideas: if it were Japanese or Australian soldiers who had flown planes into the Twin Towers, Trump’s rhetoric against Muslims and Middle Eastern men and women would be powerless. However, because of 9/11 and our supposed “war on terror,” it’s easier to view others as potential terrorists and our enemies simply because they are Middle Eastern in descent. It’s simply how we’ve been conditioned to think.

From the Archive: Hamlet and the Myth of Redemptive Violence

Revenge is a beautiful yet shallow temptation; something not foreign to contemporary media. Luke Skywalker spends the entirety of A New Hope, The Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi attempting to avenge his parents, only to find out that his own father was his enemy all along, leading to grief, confusion, and anger. In Out of the Furnace, Christian Bale’s character successfully avenges his brothers’ death, yet instead of finding comfort with the pull of the trigger, he remains as empty as before. Shakespeare also picks up on this theme with plays such as Hamlet and Romeo and Juliet. With these examples in mind, the question needs to be asked: if revenge never satisfies, why do we feel the need to try time and time again? The answer is that until a proper view of justice is developed, a justice defined by restoration and healing rather than retribution, pain and suffering will inevitably increase, allowing the myth of redemptive violence to continue its destructive work within society, and this is most eloquently demonstrated by looking at Jesus Christ.

Love and Trinity (Or, How Seminary is Helping Me Learn to Love My Wife Better)

Truth be told, whenever I see an article come along on my newsfeed dealing with marriage or families, I typically tune out. It’s not that I hate my family—far from it. I just know if I go to this article, even if everything is reasonable and thought out, there is a large chance that the comments section will be gehenna on earth. Plus, no matter what anyone says, it’s nearly impossible not to read the comments. It’s a black hole that continually sucks you in…. There is truly no escape.

So it is with the greatest irony that I write an article about marriage and my family. Now, to be fair, I’m not a famous mommy/Patheos blogger, which means one of two things:

  1. This post is not going to go viral.
  2. Because this post is not going going to go viral, the comments section will be either a) nonexistent or b) incredibly tame.

Now that we’ve gotten that out of the way. . .

Being married for two years and being a dad for nearly a year has been eye-opening in more ways than one. When I met my wife, I didn’t have a whole lot going for my life. I had just moved home from college (transferred to the online program), broken up with my long-distance girlfriend, and was struggling to find a job. Most of my time was spent playing Playstation 3 and reading N.T. Wright (AKA best use of my time ever). All of this means: when I met her, I realized I had a lot to change.

Trump, Clinton, and Jesus: Our Behavior During Election Season

You would be hard-pressed to find anyone who views this year’s Presidential election situation as “normal.” In the one corner, we have a celebrity with no political experience; in the other, we have a former president’s wife. Both candidates are incredibly controversial, which has led many to proclaim they will “simply” choose the lesser of two evils.

Except for a large group of Americans, Christian and otherwise, their choice isn’t evil. While Trump may have seemed like a joke at first, we are now seeing people who legitimately want him as president and view him as the best choice for making America “great again.” They applaud his ability to speak his mind and perceive him as being the next logical step to correct our Obama-stained nation. And for those who are in Hillary’s camp, the desire to be #neverTrump has convinced many to look at this woman (a woman running for President! Let that sink in for a moment) as someone who may actually have a chance to continue Obama’s legacy of civil rights and protection. Surely her appeals to minority demographics and attempts to ensure individual freedoms are something to vote for, right?

There are no more results.