Beer, Christianity, The Least of These, and MN Shutdown

One of the topics getting a lot of attention today is the upcoming loss of Coors/Miller beer sales in MN. I don’t know if the remaining brands could pick the slack, being the Coors/Miller market share is near 40% in the state. If remaining brands can’t, much higher prices, and even a shortage of beer seems around the corner.

There also exists an element of moral outrage by some, that the needs of the vulnerable in the state are a lower priority than folks getting their beer. A few commentators have suggested that the lack of beer may be the impetus needed for the government to solve the budget issue.

I’m not quite sure what to think of this.

Amongst many pastor types of both parties and a multitude of denominations is a statement that a society is judged by how it takes care of the least of these. In the NT, we have the admonition of Jesus in Matthew to individuals that failure to feed and cloth the poor will not end well. In the OT, we have cities being vaporized for society seemingly having an out of sight, out of mind view of the poor.

In MN, we may have no beer.

A very honest socially conservative Christian laid out his views as concerns Jesus words in the NT quite well.

It’s a sobering warning, and I fear that I’m typical. For the most part I think about myself: my needs, my interests, my desires. And when I break out of my cocoon of self-interest, it’s usually because I’m thinking about my family or my friends, which is still a kind of self-interest. The poor? Sure, I feel a sense of responsibility, but they’re remote and more hypothetical than real: objects of a thin, distant moral concern that tends to be overwhelmed by the immediate demands of my life. As I said, I’m afraid I’m typical.

As a liberal, it would be easy to point fingers at this thinking, perhaps even tieing it directly to last weeks lectionary, where wealth and concerns of the world choke out the word of God in the parable of the sower. To some extent, when I see folks going “tsk, tsk, beer is more important than keeping grandma alive”, many parallels do exist with the thorny ground thing.

The thing is, other factors do enter in. Well meaning folks can disagree as to how to best take care of the poor. The above fellow goes on:

Some say the best way to meet these needs involves adopting tax policies designed to stimulate economic growth, along with redoubled efforts of private charity. Others emphasize public programs and increased government intervention. It’s an argument worth having, of course, and to a great degree our contemporary political debates turn on these issues. But we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that there is a unifying consensus: The moral character of a nation is measured to a large degree by its concern for the poor.

He then presents an answer, likely shared by many social conservatives.

On this point I agree with many friends on the left who argue that America doesn’t have a proper concern for the poor. Our failure, however, is not merely economic. In fact, it’s not even mostly economic.

I think such is where much of the difference of opinion ultimately lies. No wonder we had MN Republican legislators messing around with societal legislation, rather than working on the budget. They likely feel if they can legislate their version of morality, poverty will self correct a bit, such that less services will be needed. In a related vein, many liberals believe if the environment is properly cared for, public health costs are likely to decrease.

Ultimately, I don’t understand how grandma’s oxygen needs, and the costs of atmospheric separation, labor, transportation and overhead is all of a sudden going to drop in cost out of the willingness of folks hearts. Perhaps in the longer term, it could happen as society might shift more altruistic, but grandma, and perhaps a generation or two, might be long gone before that happens. I could be too cynical in this, but if a surgeon is $350K in debt… I don’t think anyone, even a social conservative, expects them to work for little or no pay.

The fellow then goes on with the following:

Progressives talk about “social responsibility.” It is an apt term, but it surely means husbanding social capital just as much as—indeed, more than—providing financial resources. In our society a preferential option for the poor must rebuild the social capital squandered by rich baby boomers, and that means social conservatism. The bohemian fantasy works against this clear imperative, because it promises us that we can attend to the poor without paying any attention to our own manner of living. Appeals to aid the less fortunate, however urgent, make few demands on our day-to-day lives. We are called to awareness, perhaps, or activism, but not to anything that would cut against the liberations of recent decades and limit our own desires.

I think he nails it with the last sentence. In a lot of ways, this parallels the angst many have with short term mission trips, outsourcing services to the poor, and in general not wanting to self/family sacrifice.

Beer shortages impact daily living for the average Joe. The homeless lady w/o a prescription can jump govt hoops if she fits the right demographic, otherwise she must do without. Her poverty has little to no effect on the average Joes daily living… but if you know her, such is likely different.

There is no question, money must play a huge role, as one cant create grandmas oxygen or gene therapy drugs via individualistic “moral” living, no matter how much one ones to spin it. Likewise, the toddler who needs a special diet via a feeding tube can’t very well survive via a food bank.

By the same token, simply throwing money at an issue, all the while refusing to invest social capital, ie refusing to get ones own / families hands dirty is not an answer either. Such opens the door to skimming, and a multitude of unintended consequences such as government over-reach, state-church co-mingling, misplaced incentives, and mandated moral hazards, all of which are counter to the issue at hand. Real approaches to caring for the least of these, require both financial, and social capital.

Posted in Social Ministry | Leave a comment

The Sower Goes All Over

On the spreading of God’s word and the parable of the sower. Some bits from some sermons.

If the Sower is walking the hard packed road, is not the fertile soil farthest away, farthest away from the Sower and most reliant on the wind of God’s Spirit to carry it aloft and home to the good ground? Rev Gene

Seed eating birds are not the end state, they drop seeds all over, often on better soil, bird seeded mulberry bushes show up everywhere. Pastor Steve

It is as if the sower got on his John Deere, hooked up the Model SS10B Broadcast Spreader, and before he even drove out of the barn, pushed the PTO button that started the hopper spinning. As he drives to the field, seed is slinging everywhere! On the driveway, in the grass, bouncing off of passing cars, whizzing into the weeds on the side of the road, and finally – finally – as he drives into the field, the seed flies where it’s actually supposed to go! Tragic_Pizza

Some obervations from my garden:

Soil turns into a hard pack where nothing will grow if you follow the same exact samepath all the time. Such is advantageous for weed control. It is probably less so a good idea when it comes to spreading the Gospel.

Areas of minimal soil are not forever, quick shoots die off, and eventually turn into compost, which is uber fertile, but the wind blows it everywhere.

Thorns and vines are fleeting deals… they are there for a seasons, and they die, and new ones often return to take thier place. Gaps between growths do exist for a time. I’ve used this for automatic weed control, by planting corn, beans, and squash together. Likewise, I now have some volunteer tomatoes and a raspberry vine in my strawberry patch.

The parable brings home the radical idea to plant seeds everywhere, let no spot be left unseeded… even the spots off the beaten path.

Posted in Growth and Discipleship | Leave a comment

Safe Space and Youth Ministry

Kenda Dean presents 10 characteristics of a healthy youth ministry, and the tenth one was called safe space… Its fascinating in that Jesus pretty much ripped safety out of the practices of 2000 years ago by upending tribal ingroup/loyalty, authority/hierarchy, and religious based purity. Its disturbing that as youth ministry evolved over the years, it seemingly embraced much of what Jesus put aside in the interest of safety.

Tribalism and Fear

Youth groups tend to be very tribal focused, ie safety in numbers, and fear of other groups. Some go so far as to embrace isolationism and fear of others.

Authority / Hierarchy

Often times youth ministry revolves around its leaders. Youth often look to the leader as the center, case in point when a leader moves on, youth group fall apart time and time again. Parents look to the leader to outsource their baptismal promise. The leader looks to the executive pastor.

Religious Purity

Often times moral issues and purity seem to occupy a greater priority of youth ministry than does Jesus. Its no wonder moral therapeutic theism is so predominant amongst the young adult crowd.

All of the above are focused on safety, and while at odds with Jesus message, are likewise at odds with the “safe space” which Kendra Dean presents.

Young people need safe spaces in their lives where they can “be” themselves instead of trying to “prove” themselves. Safe space can means time, relationships, or physical space where young people have the emotional, relational, physical, and spiritual freedom to explore, to risk, and to fail in a safety net of love–real love, not the Hallmark stuff. Safe spaces give youth the experience of being really “seen” and known as God sees and knows them, as beloved brothers and sisters of Christ.

If i think back to my years in camping ministry, and the resulting arguments I had back then.. the over-scheduling and activities to keep kids busy and out of trouble, rather than prayer and available percolation time, safety really was the bottom line, rather than safe space.

The thing is, safe space is anathema to many… exploration and risk are scary deals, likewise is failure, and the need to establish REAL safety nets. This is further complicated, as such goes far beyond the realm of just the youth leader, it really requires buy-in and participation of the entire faith community.

Yes, if you ask church councils what is important, children, youth, and families come up again and again…. but implementation is where the rubber meats the road. Matt Cleaver has some good points on what youth ministry needs more of, and what youth ministry needs less of which present some great ideas for change. The question is, will folks go beyond the words of church councils and take to heart what change/work might really need to happen?

Posted in Growth and Discipleship | Leave a comment

The Logistical Problems of Acts 2:36-40

In todays world, Acts 2:36-40 would pose a serious organizing and logistics problem… back then, it would be even more of a challenge. Lets roll on the text.

36 “Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah.”

37 When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”

38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”

40 With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.” 41 Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.
Peter gave the message, and folks responded… Lets think about the logistics problems.

First… the probability of every person responding and getting Baptised is about nil. More realistically only a percentage of folks got Baptised, which means a whole lot more folks than 3000 had to hear the message. If we look at the following graph of yearly adult baptisms vs weekly attendance based upon a limited sampling of the St Paul area synod…

…it would seem that well over 200,000 folks would need to hear the message in the best case!

Then again, lets assume Peter had 20X greater success than the best we are doing today, thus 10,000 folks would need to show up. (This is even more impressive in that the above chart is based upon baptisms/year… not baptisms/day!)

Second… How do you gather 10,000 folks together to hear the message, there were no flash mobs, no TV, no radio spots, only word of mouth.

Third… Peter didn’t have an arena with 20,000 watts of audio power, he didn’t even have a PA system, more so, he was more than likely open air preaching… with that many people, Peters message was likely to only reach a few hundred folks if that, due to the ambient noise levels.

Fourth… Assuming each Baptism took at maximum one minute, at least 50 hours would be needed…

Bottom line… Peter had to have a ton of help, he’d need PR type folks to get people out there, he’d need folks to orally repeat his message in near real time, he’d need folks to jump in doing Baptisms etc. No way could one guy, or even one guy with a few  fellow apostles pull this off in the alotted time frame.

As a result, one would like to think that the larger the church is, the greater the potential for scalability of effort, but such doesn’t seem to be the case today as evidenced in the above chart. If anything the reverse appears true, and the larger the church, the greater the dilution of effort… hmmm

*The chart is courtesy of Tim Thompson @feralpastor as part of his learning to evangelize resolution for the St Paul Area synod assembly.

Posted in Growth and Discipleship | Leave a comment

Justice and Mercy, Christian Responses on Twitter in re Osama’s Death

I’ve been following the twitter stream on and off tonight, and responses of Christians are all over the place. So much so, an outsider could well think that Christians have widely differing scriptures, rather than the same Bible. Big picture wise, I think much of it rolls down to how individual Christians view justice, mercy, and the balance between the two, or perhaps if there should even be a balance.

Granted, for those who suffered the loss of friends and/or family members during 911, a focus on justice just due to basic human nature is likely to predominate. Likewise, for those who are very much pro-life, mercy is likely to predominate. One also has to consider that some will tie nationalism into this, which seemingly is possible after a careful study of Augustine’s Just War Theory.

In light of this happening on Divine Mercy Sunday, as well as John Paul II’s Beatification, I thought it would be useful to reread his encyclical entitled Rich in Mercy.

mercy is in a certain sense contrasted with God’s justice, and in many cases is shown to be not only more powerful than that of justice but also more profound. Already the Old Testament teaches that, although justice is an authentic virtue in man, and in God signifies transcendent perfection, nevertheless love is “greater” than justice: greater in the sense that it is primary and fundamental. Love, so to speak, conditions justice and, in the final analysis, justice serves love. The primacy and superiority of love in the face of justice – and this is a mark of the whole of revelation – are revealed precisely through mercy. This seemed so obvious to the psalmists and prophets that the very term justice ended up meaning the salvation accomplished by the Lord and His Mercy (Ps 4011; 98:2f; Is 45:21; 51:5; 56:1). Mercy differs from justice, but it is not in opposition to it, if we admit in the history of man, as the Old Testament precisely does, the presence of God, who as Creator has already linked Himself to His creature with a particular love. Love, by its very nature, excludes hatred and ill will toward the one to whom He once gave the gift of Himself: Nihil odisti eorum quae fecisti “you hold nothing of what you have made in abhorrence” (Wis 11:24). These words indicate the profound basis of the relationship between justice and mercy in God, in His relations with man and the world. They tell us that we must seek the life-giving roots and intimate reasons for this relationship by going back to “the beginning,” in the very mystery of creation. They foreshadow in the context of the Old Covenant the full revelation of God, who is “love” (1 Jn 14:16).

Yet, going back to those who lost loved ones and friends, the divine love John Paul II speaks of is very very hard. A fellow who struggles with this presents the following:

Can we forgive Bin Laden? Can we pray for God to have mercy on his soul? Can we weep for the senseless death we find in any war? Include his name in the prayer of the faithful?

Answering no, only means that the enemy continues to win–even when it feels right to celebrate.

Perhaps God can forgive Bin Laden and in God’s perfect reconciliation we find our human imperfection reaching its limits? After all, we are not Jesus, who called from his cross for mercy, not for himself, but for those who nailed him to the wood.

But that merciful call goes out to us as well. It haunts us to pray for peace and not pain, reconciliation, but not revenge.

Can we forgive Osama Bin Laden?

I hope one day I can. And because I believe that Debbie, Tom and Jeannine are firmly united with God in eternal salvation, it helps me to also believe that their sainthood already gives them the perfection to do what I and probably many others find so difficult, nay, even repulsive or impossible.

The entire entry is a must read, it pretty much ties justice, mercy, nationalism, and human struggle together in such a way as to be all encopassing.

Posted in Growth and Discipleship | Leave a comment

Christian Unity and the US Govt in the 1800′s

Lyman Beecher was a Presbyterian pastor, and is known for his leadership in the 2nd great awakening. Much of what he said concerning the church and state going way back to the late 1800′s has many parallels today, especially so when it comes to unity.

In his younger days, Lyman Beecher said the following:

In The Spirit of the Pilgrims 1831

The Government of God is the only government which will hold society against depravity within and temptation without.

In his Plea for the West, 1835,

If this nation is, in the providence of God, destined to lead the way in the moral and political emancipation of the world, it is time she understood her high calling, and were harnessed for the work. For mighty causes, like floods from distant mountains, are rushing with accumulating power to their consummation of good or evil, and soon our character and destiny will be stereotyped forever.

The context of Pastor Beechers comments was the push to decouple churches and the state. Views such as his as a younger man were commonly held viewpoints amongst many church folks. They were aghast at the push for separation of church and state years prior, and now that states were starting to likewise decouple the churches, they were exceedingly bent out of shape. They feared the downfall of the nation and society.

An interesting thing happened though… rather than the Gospel withering on the vine, the churches stepped up to the plate in a huge way. Many hold that such separation played a huge role in the second great awakening.

Lyman Beecher describes what happened near the end of his life in his autobiography (p344). He said the following with regards to the state of Conneticut severing its ties with the churches:

I suffered what no tongue can tell for the best thing that ever happened to the state of Conneticut It cut the Churches loose from dependence on State support. It threw them wholly on their own resource, and on God. They said ministers would loose their influence; the fact is they have gained. By volutary effoert, societies, missions, and revivals, they exert a deeper influence….

Not only did the event prove that religion was quickend,and enfused with a healthier life, when its unnatural connection with the State had ceased, and that more money was given freely to the support of the Gospel…

From the British Quarterly Review published in 1876!

The Churches of the pilgrim type which had been limping on the crutches of Caesar so long that their limbs were stiffening with inaction, have developed a vigour unknown before.

The inherent vital energy of the gospel has demonstrated that, with the ordinary blessing of Him of whom extraordinacy blessings may be confidently claimed by faith, it can be trsuted to take care of itself in the word.

Its interesting to see what happened when the state separated from the churches… continued from the British Quarterly review.

Disestablishment in New England has promoted a just catholicity between Christians of various shades of belief Standing alias one before the law all are thrown back upon the fundamental principles of their common Christianity and the teaching of that Word of God equally acknowledged by all and there being no element of felt injustice longer to force them apart they drift naturally toward that position indicated by the wise and catholic principle In essentials unity in non essentials diversity in all things charity The motto of William Penn was We must yield the liberty we demand Nowhere on the round earth we are persuaded has the practical union possible among Christians who differ as to minor principles been more beautifully or more beneficently exhibited than during the last generation in New England.

This above was written in 1876… so how come 135 years later, we have such problems? Christian polarization runs left and right, and arguments are everywhere. I’m jumping into the rally to restore unity… but I think once the week has passed, the diatribes will return in short order.

I think George Santayana with this quote written some hundred years ago provides an answer. “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Posted in Growth and Discipleship | Leave a comment

Audience is Key, The Parable of the Mustard Seed

There is a problem with the parable of the mustard seed. Matthew 13:31-32

He told them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in his field. 32 Though it is the smallest of all seeds, yet when it grows, it is the largest of garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds come and perch in its branches.”

The problem: The mustard seed is not the smallest of all seeds.

The issue at hand: The smallest of all seeds is the coral root orchid seed. It is so small, you could barely see it without significant visual aids, non of which existed at the time said scripture was written. The smallest visually observable seed one might come across is the Wolffia, just slightly smaller than a single grain of salt.

Secondary problems of the smaller seeds: Folks dont plant wolffia, being its fruit is hardly larger than the seed itself… Likewise, folks dont plant orchid seeds, and even if they did, they wouldnt grow without a symbiotic partner.

So whats the deal? Jesus couldn’t very well jump into a botanical discussion of plants which could not be seen, or talk about tropical rain forests, or talk of a foreign land called Australia. Rather, he spoke the language of the people, within the context of what they could understand.

The Bottom line: The wonders of scripture and the mysterys of such are huge… when we try to force scripture into a domain and or context for which it was never intended, we can end up running in circles… and totally miss the point.

Jesus answers the disciples questions as to why the parables in Matthew 13:11-15… its a similar deal here.

11 He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12 Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. 13 This is why I speak to them in parables:

“Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand.

14 In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:

“‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
15 For this people’s heart has become calloused;
they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them

Posted in Growth and Discipleship | Leave a comment

Jesus Throws a Wrench into Morality

Morality can be viewed through five difference windows, harm, reciprocity, ingroup, hierarchy, and purity. Such windows into a given moral worldview are pretty commonly described throughout the Old Testament. In contrast, I fully believe the words of Christ tend to reorganize and even cast significant aspects of such windows aside.

Having come across some really funky eisigesis in my noon readings today, where in the author tried to toss any number of Jesus teachings to the wind… I was left wondering why and how this can happen. In a lot of ways, I think the author was so tied into a specific moral world view, that he couldn’t tolerate what Jesus had to say. As such, the only way he could even listen to the message of Christ was to take some rather extreme eisegesis.

Lets roll on through some of the moral windows.

Harm/Welfare/Care

In the Old Testament times, folks were to set aside part of their tithe for the poor, likewise the harvest was not to be 100%, parts were to be set aside such that the poor could glean them. Jesus went much further, with his emphasis on individual service and blessings to the orphans, the widows, and the poor.

Justice/Rights/Fairness

Likewise, justice, rights, and fairness were also significant teachings of Jesus. His direct focus on the least of these, the prisoners, and the oppressed, no doubt threw many a wrench into the people that heard him. Yes, prophets in the OT preached justice time and time again, and Sodom was blown away for its lack of justice and concern for the poor… but still no one listened, much less acted.

Group Loyalty

Jesus aggravated the people of Israel in a huge way more than a few times. Folks wanted a revolutionary to rise up against the Romans… what they got was a revolution against their own. What they got was Jesus who crossed the lines to Romans, to Gentiles, and to Samaritans. For those he called, there was almost always a significant cost… they had to leave their group, their families, their wealth, their safety behind.

Respect for Authority, Hierarchy

Jesus upended this most spectacularly with his emphasis on service, and the inversion of rewards and the power structure, much to the chagrin of the leaders of that day. Likewise, he put many leaders and authorities in the hot seat time and time again.

Purity, Sexuality, Food, and Religious Law

Jesus likewise upended the purity laws, whether it be healing on the Sabbath, eating food on the Sabbath, or hanging out with those who would have been considered unclean. Most assuredly for those who had put a stake down in this sector of morality, Jesus must have been anathama to them being viewed as a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and “sinners.” Yes, he did come down on divorce, and adultery… but he seemed to come down a whole lot harder on greed, and the religious laws and practices of the day.

The Eisegesis Guy Once Again

Getting back to the eisegesis guy… he put exceedingly high values on ingroup, hierarchy, and in some of his other writings on purity. With such an extreme focus in those arenas, its no wonder his worldview did not allow him to consider that Jesus would even speak of harm, much less justice in regards to morality.

Posted in Growth and Discipleship | Leave a comment

Americans, Israel and Palestine

Hous asked the following on twitter. “Do most Americans misunderstand Israel and Palestine?” and then linked to a really cool blog post. While the blog entry itself is interesting, the ongoing comments are where things really rock.

Some themes spin out of this.

  1. The need to distinguishing between the religious and the political aspects.
  2. The need to distinguish between modern and ancient Israel.
  3. There is WAY too big of a gap between ways of thinking and cultures for people in the West to say what they say without understanding the people in the East who are in the heart of it.

Hous’ comment on Mar 23 really hits home. Some bits from it.

….you really have no idea how bad it can get. They “straight line equate” biblical Israel with modern Israel, believe God wants them to displace all of the Palestinians, believe a lot of bizarre apocalyptic things about rebuilding the temple, etc., and categorically reject everything Palestinian and Arab, even faithful Palestinian Arab Christians. This line of thinking is very real and held by tens of millions of Americans.

Such is a problem, a huge problem, and its not one thats easily solved. If it were just an area of theological dispute, greater emphasis on proper Biblical exegesis would solve it organically.

Instead for far too many, mere mention that such beliefs could be in error come across as an attack on their entire faith structure, and they may well dismiss further Biblical study on the matter.

In a lot of ways, I think the whole “left behind” industry holds the blame for this mess. Much more so than Darby, or even Schofield for that matter. (While I find pretrib to be a huge error, in and of itself it doesnt have to lead the wild beliefs which Hous writes about). Its a sad deal, that far too many Christians know more left behind trivia than they do of the scriptures.

Perhaps a direct counter to the left behind industry based upon rock solid scriptures and theology, (perhaps even if it includes pretrib eschatology) may be part of the answer.

Posted in Growth and Discipleship | 3 Comments

Penal Substitionary Atonement, and the Dangers There of

The early church fathers for the most part did not ascribe to substitutionary atonement. For sure, some scriptures do very heavily lean that direction. Yet, other scriptures end up throwing a pretty massive wrench in that direction. Whats perhaps the most troubling, is it appears some contemporary preachers go so far as to nearly equate the Gospel to penal substitutionary atonement.

I’ve often found it interesting that the early church fathers did not hold so such. Origen (185-254 CE) presented the ransom theory

He suggested that, as a result of the sin of Adam and Eve, Satan had acquired a formal dominion over, and ownership of, all of humanity and the rest of the world. In order to free people from the grip of Satan, God agreed to arrange the death of Yeshua, his son, as a ransom price to be paid to the devil. This would formally compensate for Adam and Eve’s sin, and would release humanity from Satan’s grip. Origen wrote: “The payment could not be [made] to God [be]cause God was not holding sinners in captivity for a ransom, so the payment had to be to the devil.” Origen believed that Satan accepted the offer because he assumed that he would end up with ownership of Yeshua. The devil didn’t realize that Yeshua would escape his clutches. God deceitfully pulled a “bait and switch” operation by resurrecting Yeshua a day and a half after his death on the cross. This left Satan without any reward. Yeshua had escaped Satan’s grasp and was reunited with God. Origen concluded that humans can then be reconciled with God if they trust Yeshua as Lord and Savior.

A couple disturbing things I’ve come across over the years are the following.

1. Folks who have seemingly walked away from Christ, often see God’s actions in PSA as cruel and barbaric.

A blogger over at arewomenhuman stated the following:

I couldn’t stomach the thought of standing in church and singing hymns thanking God for killing someone “for” me.

Another good discussion of this is presented in “The cross is an Insult to Forgiveness”

I’ve often wondered if the doors to trinitarian heresies are opened by PSA. For many in the pew, its almost as if the focus shifts to God torturing Jesus. Its as if Jesus was not God, and as such, it seemingly pretty much throws the trinity by the wayside. Anselm’s (1033 to 1109 CE) satisfaction theory (which predated PSA), in his Cur Deus Homo (Why God Became Man) presents the following:

  • Chapter 6 “…the price paid to God for the sin of man [must] be something greater than all the universe besides God….Moreover, it is necessary that he who can give God anything of his own which is more valuable than all things in the possession of God, must be greater than all else but God himself….Therefore none but God can make this satisfaction.”
  • Chapter 9 “…God, he will possess omnipotence….He can, then, if he chooses, lay down his life and take it again….Therefore is he able to avoid death if he chooses, and also to die and rise again….the gift which he presents to God, not of debt but freely, ought to be something greater than anything in the possession of God….Now this can neither be found beneath him nor above him….In himself, therefore, must it be found….nothing can be more severe or difficult for man to do for God’s honor, than to suffer death voluntarily when not bound by obligation; and man cannot give himself to God in any way more truly than by surrendering himself to death for God’s honor. Therefore, he who wishes to make atonement for man’s sin should be one who can die if he chooses.”

2. It is possible that PSA may open doors for spiritual abuse and/or the replacement of God’s love and grace with toxic soteriology, even more so without the solid grounding of the trinity. Arewomenhuman presents the following:

Substitutionary atonement requires us to accept that it’s alright for God to behave in ways that would be considered cruel and capricious from anyone else. It requires that we claim God is “good” in a way that doesn’t resemble what we would call “good” in any other context. It preaches a patriarchal God who brooks no defiance and demands perfection from others that “he” doesn’t live up to, and doesn’t have to live up to. In so doing it provides a script and model for authoritarian, hierarchical, abusive relationships between human beings that mirror the authoritarian, hierarchical, abusive relationship between God and humans.

While I’d be in error to attribute causality, my experience with multitudes of de-churched folks over the years, has often indicated that when PSA leans towards or replaces the Gospel, spiritual abuse is often right around the corner.

I wonder if perhaps the early church fathers anticipated this danger, and thus shied away from PSA? They had the same scriptures we do today, and its not as if there were not historical discussions seemingly pointing to PSA… but it was left by the wayside.

Posted in Ecclesiology | 2 Comments