Your view of the Atonement?

A friend from another seminary contacted me last week and wanted me  evaluate the Moral influence vs. Penal Substitutionary theories of atonement. These are two widely held views that have invaded todays evangelical scene. Mark Driscoll and the New Calvinist movement uses the term Penal Substitution often in sermons and writing. One theological camp sings “when i survey the wonderous cross” while the other has a fascination with the blood of Christ in songs such as “Nothing but the Blood”.. I have never considered myself a strong theologian in soteriology, but this is not an area that should be taken lightly. I will simply summarize each view according to my best understanding and conclude with final thoughts. Please correct me if my understanding of the two are different than you have heard or read...

BTW..I am well aware of the proof texts for each camp but didn’t include them for space sake.

Moral influence theory-  

View that holds that God’s nature is essentially love. It’s proponents, apparent from reading, minimize justice, holiness, and righteousness. Healing souls is essentially what Jesus came to do according to this view. We repent essentially because of the love of Christ exemplified on the Cross. Peter Abelard insisted that God didn't make a sacrificial payment to the Father to satisfy his dignity, but rather, exhibit love. Proponents say, the difficulty with sin isn't God’s need to punish evil for the necessity of appeasement, but through His love to heal spiritual sickness. 

This seems to be a fairly popular theory in liberal scholarship which emphasizes the effect of Christ's death on the sinner. I hope we would all agree that It is important that we do respond to God with love which was displayed on the cross.  While this theory has truth, it’s preponderantly insufficient.  

Basic Goal= To Show God’s Love to us.

Object= humanity

Hodge's criticism= http://www.ccel.org/ccel/hodge/theology2.iv.ix.iii.html

Illustration: You are trapped in a burining building. Someone comes inside the building and allows himself to catch on fire to show you how horrible it is to burn to death so that you would decide to leave the building.

Penal Substitution:

vicarious atonement means to stand in the place of another or represent another. 

This is a popular reformed position, proponents such as Calvin, that sees sin as a very serious matter of breaking God’s law. They take serious the teachings of the wrath, holiness, and justice of God. Christ’s death was effectual for taking the sinner’s place. Christ bore our punishment  while appeasing the wrath of God in our place. 

Basic Goal= to Appease Wrath, Release mercy

Object= God

Illustration: You committed a crime, in court you are sentenced to die, but someone else goes to the electric chair in your place.

Socinus criticisms & response =  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_substitution#Criticisms

My Concluding Thoughts:

The moral view or penal substitution view are both intelligible. But how does sacrifice save? Both views demonstrate the multifaceted realities contained in the momentous act of redemption. What brings them into focus are the attributes of God that each one emphasizes more than the other. Love vs. Wrath etc.... This shows how God’s attributes are rooted in the act of atonement. Could it be a paradox or mystery?Is the justice of God most loving? 

There are dimensions of truth in most views of the atonement. Moral view= God is love and he demonstrated self-sacrificing love on the Cross. We all should agree It ought to have a moral influence on us. However, I find the Moral Influence view inadequate and doesn't quite go far enough. The Substitutionary Satisfaction to God  fully explains the necessary objective basis for the atonement. Without Christ paying the penalty of sin, God couldn’t be just. (Rom. 3:21-23) The Justifier of the Just couldn't be just without substitutionary atonement. Most theories of atonement, instead of centering on Christ and offering an objective response, which only substitutionary atonement does, lean more on subjective elements and focus on Satan or humanity. I would agree with Thomas Aquinas who said “Substitutionary atonement is not merely fitting, but essential.”

Pro-house church

I am actually pro-house church.. b/c I believe GOd can use all kinds of Churches. I want house churches to work, but I do have some theological and ecclesiological concerns... I certainly believe God can and will use house churches.. However, I would be hesitant to refer to the church as a movement as thought she will fade with time.

Simple Churches on College Campuses? Why Not?

I just finished reading“The Blueprint: A Revolutionary Plan to Plant Missional Communities On Campus” by Jaeson Ma. Ma suggests that a simple church model of missional communites (aka. church) is the best model to reach collegians. He has planted over 300 missional communities on 80 plus college campuses. This model is similar to organic church and house church models. you can understand the movement better by reading Organic Church by Neil Cole. The book is practical, inspirational, and has great food for thought in terms of methodological discipleship. While the simple church movement is largely inter-denominational in nature, charismatic theological tendencies are evident throughout most of the movement according to Ma. His chapter tItles include prophetic worship, apostolic preaching (which is participatory and interactive), and demonic deliverance are just a hint of his theology. His associations include “the Call” in Nashville Tn. and IHOP ministry in St. Louis, Mo. His theology is only important for this post because it directly affects his ecclesiology. The book spends alot of time discussing the interpretation of his dreams and interpreting prophecies that his spiritual fathers/mothers have provided. While there is much to be learned by a house church movement, there is still much to be critiqued and considered. 

Are simple churches the future of church? what are the dangers of simple churches? 

Let’s talk about the POSSIBLE dangers of the simple church movement. We all know the statistics of declining mainline churches in America. We also have read all the conceivable church growth strategies that try to combat these declining numbers. 

It may be possible that this economic crisis may lead to a new church strategy that has intentionally retaliated against the rockstar/concert style mega-church ministry. Simplicity is in, Complexity is out. 

It appears to me that ecclesiastical trends seem to change with the season and they all claim the be apostolic. Ecclesiology, not culture is theological. 

Wikipedia, the Internet encyclopedia, describes Simple Church this way: Sociologically speaking, simple church could be seen as a subset of Emerging church[8] (although many in the simple church movement would not see themselves as part of emerging church[9]), a phenomenon rising from the conversation between Christianity and the culture and worldview of postmodernism. Many in the emerging church movement would consider simple church to be represented in expressions such as house church and unique gatherings like Church in a pub.

Practically speaking, which I am a pragmatist, the average lifespan of a simple church is merely 6 months to 2 years. 

Some of the concerns with simple model include leadership responsibility and polity.  What are the qualifications for leaders, pastors, etc?? ...what is the leadership structure? what is the church polity? Sure, it’s easy to say biblical, but what qualifies a person to accurately interpret a biblical system without the proper training and tools to do so? I guess you could Wikipedia the greek/hebrew? 

 One of the greatest concerns with inadequate leadership training is the susceptibility to abuse, cultism, and heresy which invades these churches much more of a higher rate than other ecclesiastical systems according to one study. 

Another practical point is this... People are simply attracted to good teaching. History proves this because crowds tend to flock toward them..ie. Billy Graham, George Whitfield, etc. or whoever your fav. teacher/preacher is... umm maybe Peter?? or Paul??

If the Word is presented only through participatory/interactive styles rather than a typical preaching style , then there is the availability to welcome Chaos and tension will build from different hermeneutical practices. Being a part of an inter denominational ministry has validated my concerns. 

How is education and discipleship formed w/o any sort of structure or doctrinal statement? Under this model, seminaries are often discouraged. I know that many resources in this movement have provided sufficient answers to my concerns; while being a pragmatist, I have present what I have seen firsthand. I will allow you to decide based on your ecclesiological belief. 

While organized and institutional denominations surely has it's pitfalls, we have all reaped the benefit of organizational unity and ecclesiological programs.

There is obviously a correlation between the simple church movement and postmodernism because of a refusal to propositional and pastoral authority. This may require a new posting later.

In conclusion, Jaeson Ma's simple church model would be a great model for discipleship groups rather than a church model. We are essentially taking corporate worship out of the traditional approach with simple church...if that is traditional church does her part to disciple..

Just Think... How Should We Teach the Bible?

The debate continues to heat up b/t preachers who support an expository style vs. a topical style. Recently, Ed Stetzer, lifeway researcher, sat down with preaching rockstar Andy Stanley about his book "Communicating for a Change, which is #1 in 3 different categories on Amazon.com. Andy was raised and trained on expositional teaching, but his books supports a different style that should be given thoughtful consideration at the very least. maybe even restructuring an expository message and rehearsing it to an audience as a test.. The issue of expository vs. topical gets complex b/c of reasons I don't have the time to go into at this moment.. However, It may be that we are polarizing the two unjustly. Is it not true that many expository messages are topical in nature... You can still use Andy's method and stay expository... In fact, I've heard Andy exegete passages better than Johnny Mac and Piper. For instance, Stanley did a Series on the Book of Romans called NuMe.. While it had the catchy slogan and single "sticky statements" it still was exegetical and strongly theological...

Ed Stetzer posted 3 blogs, you can find here http://blogs.lifeway.com/blog/edstetzer/ about Andy Stanley's philosophy of communicating the gospel. It is worthy to read.. If you are interested, it would be best to read Stanley's book separately. 

I also responded to Stetzer remarks....

To use yet another Andy Stanley one-liner..."I'm here to be a student before a critic." However, I would like to say that I've heard one-liners from both stetzer, stanley, other expository vs. topical professors that sound cool, but never really get to the heart of the issue, "How should we teach the Bible?" Sure Andy, sermons in the Bible weren't verse by verse because those were the words that became the verses. We can't say that as preachers today...unless we're the pope.. and Catholic.. but I know that most readers here aren't..so that doesn't really count as ammunition for pro-topical guys...Stanley certainly preaches pragmatist Christianity that asserts "Christianity Works" Expositors support more of a doctrinal and theological Christianity, but bring in application of course through their points beit alliteration or fill in the blank... At any rate, the issue here is much deeper than necessarily teaching the Bible, but rather,let's ask the question "who you are teaching or preaching to?" a different audience attends NPCC than a Bethlehem Baptist Church.. Stanley assumes he is teaching to those who aren't necessarily mature disciples.. or even Christians..., He assumes that his congregation doesn't even have to be Christian for the most part to "get it".. that is understand the Biblical principle that has OUR best interest at heart... Whereas a John Piper preaches for deep exegetical points verse by verse..Point being.My hunch is that his audience is assumed to be Christians that have a deep desire to grow.. so deep that he spent years in the book of Romans.. 

these are Two different audiences.... a philosophically and foundational difference in ecclesiology. David Platt preaches point after point yet still the pews are flooded with engaged listeners who never get bored with his missiological zeal... Sometimes we fail to forget the power of the Spirit involved in preaching, much like Auturo G. Azurdia talks about in his book "Spirit Empowered Preaching http://www.spiritempoweredpreaching.com/. Platt averages 1 hr messages of passion and spirit filled sermons... point by point.. 

I think andy would rightly say, one of Platt's messages could easily be a sermon series ...maybe even 2 or 3.. I listen to both Platt and Stanley... They are both needed as a part of communicating the urgency of the gospel... both different styles and philosophy of preaching. In conclusion, what's most important is to be faithful to the calling of Christ preach Christ Crucified.. insodoing, and regardless of what i've been taught in seminary, I tend to swing toward stanley's structure of a message and choosing topical or expository based on the audience. I find expository can mean more harmony and narration than a topical. I structure some messages with Stanley's technique because I have seen more life change happen teaching through One main principlist point rather than runnning commentary. I've delivered the same content with different structure's and Stanley's wins every time over the point by point system..People are engaged when your sermon in narrative.. I've heard compelling messages from both camps, but I can recall more content as a hearer from Stanley's camp.. Most preachers don't even remember their points... How do you expect the people to remember??.when God's word is preached...life change should happen..If Life change fails to happen, then we, as preachers (not communicators) should evaluate and ....and Yes..take responsibility for our message and not become apathetic to our efforts and then say it's God's responsibility as a cop out for your your preparation..It is God's responsibility, but He has always used people who are obedient and willing to point people to Him. Don't use theology for apathy's sake....and heaven forbid, change how we structure or communicate the gospel.

Just Think...About Unleash '09

Regardless how you feel about the "cool" up and coming church who invites you into their mega-building in order to show you how you are 1 step away from replicating their ministry in yours, there are always things we can learn ministerially because we are all students on the journey shepherding a world that is thirsty for spiritual leadership. I'm not against church growth models because methods aren't theological, but merely cultural. Choir robes, Roberts Rules of Order, steeples, and church bells (which should be illegal) aren't any more theological than church Marquis, intelligent lights, and having a building that looks like 6 flags.  Jesus used parables which were methods used to teach the theological. If lights, smoke, and a PM5D Yamaha digital board create a conducive environment for orthodox theological life change..then...sobeit.

I watched Unleash this morning on our projector and sound system with some of our leaders at the BSU.  We had to watch it online b/c I missed the 99.99 early bird special rate 6 months in advance...j/k...Unleash is a church leadership conference led by the edgy new upcoming church in Anderson, South Carolina. Senior Pastor Perry Noble led the main groups that were fed live via internet. These events essentially reignite a new inspiration for ministry. Most of my twitter friends were at the event...

one imparticular....Jason Young tweeted 72 one-liners from Perry Noble during the event... I will include these for our enjoyment.

1. God do your part and I'll do the part you want me to do
2. Question-are we willing to work
3. pastors-get out of the way of ministries...let it happen
4. Disciples didn't do everything
5. Preach on money-the one's who leave are the one's not giving anyways.
6. We often use prayer to camouflage inactivity.
7. Some churches needed to go ahead and die
8. Baptists critize beer but not buffets.
9. Church planters-let God drive your church not money
10. Every church is 1-2 decisions away from doubling in size
11. Pastors-you are responsible for getting funds to fund ministries

1. In the first 10 minutes people decide if they like your church.
2. Create a hospitality team to make others fee like rockstars!
3. Perry plans 2-3 series out. He brings men and women into the prep stage. I like
4. Perry Noble says he's not a good reader. He works with a team to do sermon prep.
5. Balance your attention between who you want to reach and who already comes.
6. The church is on cruise-we have power under the hood-stomp it.
7. Don't forget how Christ changed your life.
8. Christ followers often repel others from following Christ.
9. God has called our churches to redeem our cities!
10. Half the stuff in church I'm sick of doing...it wastes time and usually life-change isn't happening.
11. Are you manufacturing energy in your church?

1. Always treat your assistant well!
2. What gets rewarded gets repeated.
3. Most decisions can be quickly made; some decisions require a process.
4. Vision is contagious. If some staff don't get it, they won't make it
5. We are not as good as we think we are.
6. I refuse to let the church to rob my nights away from my family. I'm sick of that expectation.
7. Perry sets his family boundaries-not the church. Protect your family
8. God is speaking to me...not sure how to explain it to you.
9. Church is way into fads and not Jesus.
10. Perry just said he feels weird saying, 'I saw your twitter.
11. Perry does an invitation every week-it looks different every wee
12. Perry says there is an urgency for a harvest...and proof Jesus just might come back real soon.
13. The church shooting in Illinois will happen more
14. I keep hearing Perry and Tony say, "Listen to God and do what He says.
15. You don't need the trimmings to reach people-people want Jesus...it's just they don't always know it. The trimmings will come.
16. Perry-A lot of churches aren't growing because Pastors don't have the balls to preach all the Bible

1. Pastors-your staff depends on you to love Jesus, love family, and lead with vision
2. Satan wants to split your staff.
3. Your Pastor has a huge weight on him.
4. Pastors-do your people know you really care about them
5. Pastors-don't expect people to buy into you until you buy into them.
6. Leaders ask: who is with me
7. Leaders who say I'm playing devil's advocate...he doesn't need an advocate.
8. The ugly side of ministry usually comes from within
9. They never tell you church or ministry work is this hard
10. As a pastor, you ever want to quit
11. Got to have leadership on fire or your church won't be on fire.
12. Put one of the following words on your ministries & see what happens: new, improved, improving.
13. Hire slowly; fire quickly.
14. There is a difference between casting vision and casting need.
15. Often, people stop tithing before they stop serving

1. I want the ball...I'm in the game, God! I'm willing to take the hits
2. What if there were ministry leaders to get hold of God and Him get hold of us?
3. Do people around us see how awesome God is?
4. Be passionate about what God is about to do
5. Asking: what next, God?
6. Ministry is received not achieved!
7. You cannot explain away God's presence
8. Its okay for people to leave your church-sometimes it's the best thing for everyone.
9. Do we want attendance or repentance? You can have the first without the second.
10. I don't want to do ministry anymore if I don't desperately have Jesus show up.
11. Am I placing limits on me that God hasn't placed on me?
12. Pastors-be a prophet and say His words.
13. Some pastors are prostitutes-getting paid by the church for services to make her feel good
14. Preach every sermon like it's your last!!
15. Is it right to expect God to lead us publicly if we are not alone with Him privately  
16. Question-am I pleasing you, God?
17. Sheep don't lead the shepherd...the pastor will stand before God as a leader.

Thanks Jason...