Skip to main content

I will always love you

When I entered the conference, atonement debate was a still hot potato, but the lobbing of it had settled, and, for the most part, the various camps were simply tucking in to supper, relishing their own spuds and ignoring whatever strange-to-heretical garnishes others chose to digest. And after all, we were johnny-come-latelys to the debate; discussion of a plethora of models of atonement had been vigorous in the wider Christian world for some time before we warmed up the topic. 

With ears now attuned to this word "atonement," I pick up threads of it everywhere, slowly weaving an eclectic tapestry in shades of openness, variety, possibility, imagination, and reconciliation. The promise of hopefulness, I believe, is what ties them all together. Isn't that what salvation brings? A hope that in spite of our fallenness, we are loved? A hope that in spite of our failures, we have a purpose? A hope that in the end, all the pain and wretchedness will somehow work out all right? 

Where's the hope in an angry God who must punish someone for the inevitable failings he's engineered into his creatures? The idea that God would destroy his very self to save his oh-so-culpable creation from his own unquenchable wrath doesn't provoke loving gratefulness so much as unsettled fear in me! Whatever faithfulness comes from that servitude is motivated by self-preservation. 

Instead, the conceptions of atonement that bring both my heart and mind to worshipful response are those that paint a picture of a loving God reconciling his creation to himself. In his book, Jesus and Community, Gerhard Lohfink suggests that atonement isn't about God looking to punish someone, but God's way of saying "no matter what you do to me and mine, I will still figure out a way to love you and make it all okay, even at significant cost to myself."

Wow. That makes me fall down and worship! If that lack of vindictiveness, if that perfectly complete picture of a loving creator doesn't convict me of my sinfulness -- my failure to act as I have been created to be -- I don't think an angry God who "has just gotta make somebody pay for all this!" is going to do it.

Comments

Anonymous said…
good words, Karla
July 16, 2012 at 2:19 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Bigger dreams for a livable city

A message to a mayoral candidate Just a few thoughts arising from the BW ride with the ED.  1) That bridge connecting Edmonton and Scott across the Assiniboine would be nice, of course. But we don't have the money to even build it, much less to build all the other bridges that would be desired.  The reason that a downtown AT bridge is so greatly desired is because the city *somehow* failed to put a bike lane on the Osborne Bridge when they rehabbed it in 2010ish, despite the fact that is was in *all the plans*.  Meanwhile there *are* three bridges downtown. Yes, they all have their challenges for cyclists, but there *are* three bridges.  Whereas Maryland to Omand's Creek is a *very* long stretch with *no bridges whatsoever* (except that sewage bridge at Aubrey taunting every pedestrian or cyclist who has to bike kms out of their way to connect from Cambridge to Sherburn. Poop can cross here but humans cannot.).  Since we do not have all the money in the world to...
Post a Comment
Read more

Broken people...

After reflecting with one coworker on how often churches in all their forms really mess up and hurt a whole bunch of people in the process -- and how "we gotta do better" -- I stumbled into another conversation with a coworker which highlighted our brokenness, and I suddenly realized what was wrong with my take in the first. I wanted the church to be better at fixing our mistakes, or better yet, at not making them in the first place. But maybe this "fix-it" attitude is partly the reason we keep blowing it again and again! My friend recollected an experience when a church community was in a terrible place: compounded mistakes, hurts, and frustrations had blown up, spewing pain all over all parties. (I'm sure anyone with a long history in the church can think of one, if not several, such occasions in their past.) A new Christian who observed all these goings on responded in an unexpected way. Instead of "you people are a bunch of screw-ups! How could this pos...
5 comments
Read more

The anti-bike blog

OR I do not think [that word] means what you think it means It has become a weekly, almost daily occurrence. A how-to article or blog post will come across my path – usually in my facebook feed – touting the wonders of winter cycling. Not one to learn a lesson quickly, I keep clicking on them. Inevitably, I navigate away in frustration. It’s fun! It’s easy! Anyone can do it! You don’t need special gear; you can even look chic while you’re doing it. Oh, and get off your high horse – being a winter cyclist doesn’t make you special. This is the message of all these articles. Lies, I tell you. Now, far be it from me to dissuade people from cycling, but I think we may need different words for the varying circumstances that fall under the umbrella term “winter cycling.” Take Vancouver and Seattle, for example, where bicycle enthusiasts will talk about “winter” cycling. I’ll grant you that a bone-chilling, relentless, drenching rain is its own special brand of miserable to bi...
4 comments
Read more