Last night I went to see James Alison, a RCC theologian from the UK speak. He had some pretty interesting stuff to say- he was talking about our understanding of sin and atonement, and how our concepts in contemporary christianity are all skewif. I didn't entirely grasp everything he was talking about, and I think I need some more time to unpack it all- so watch this space.

The general gist was that we see atonement as similar to the pagan idea of sacrifices to apease an angry g/God(s). Alison contended that the Hebrew concept of atonement, and those that come through when the NT writers are talking about atonement/ Christ, are very different to this.

The concept of atonement that Alison presented was one where God is trying to get through to us, rather than us trying to keep a vengeful God happy. The sacrifice of God's own son was about God trying to reach us in our anger, and our wrath and saying "Please, trust me".

I doubt I have done the idea any real justice, but what do ppl think about understanding sin and atonement in this framework?

atonement is for fags. :P

haha

atonement is just there for people who feel guilty about everything

sin is a human concept. sin is all about your point of view. its all relative

well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

Hitler bad, Vandels good

Well, I don't see atonement as appeasing an angry God, rather I see that God made the world and gave its inhabitants rules to abide by. If we abide by them, we are given a place to live. If we do not abide by them, we are given a place to fall. I think people confuse an angry God with a just God. I've seen a lot of people who take Him as a love only God and others who take Him as basically a hate only God.