Nov. 21, 2011 issue
Canadian MBs find unity on atonement
Theological study brings more clarity on key doctrine
By Tim Huber Mennonite Weekly ReviewA Canadian Mennonite Brethren Bible study conference waded into a potentially divisive issue and found a denomination remarkably unified.
Willy Reimer, executive director of the Canadian Conference of Mennonite Brethren Churches, speaks during a Canadian Mennonite Brethren Bible study conference Oct. 27-29 in Kitchener, Ont. — Photo provided
MB leaders from across Canada met in Kitchener, Ont., Oct. 27-29 for a biennial event seeking Bible-based clarity and meaning for contemporary times. Under the title “The Mystery of the Cross,” the topic was Jesus’ atonement and how MBs understand it and tell it to others.
Brian Cooper, chair of the Canadian Conference of MB Churches’ Board of Faith and Life, which convened the meeting, said the denomination has found different segments of the church say things in different ways.
“There’s sort of a harmonious diversity of opinion on atonement theory that was a significant development that came out of the conference,” said Cooper, who is also associate dean of Mennonite Brethren Biblical Seminary-ACTS in Langley, B.C.
At issue is whether there is one correct doctrine of the atonement — which describes how Christ’s death enables forgiveness of sin — or several.
Penal substitution focuses on the death of Christ as a substitute for the punishment all humans deserve. Other models include Christus Victor, which focuses on Jesus’ triumph over the powers of darkness; and “moral influence,” which focuses on Christ’s death as the greatest example of an obedient life and teaching, which Christians are called to emulate.
Cooper said the conference was not intended to produce a definitive statement on the atonement but as a process within the Canadian MB church family.
The conference was attended by 159 delegates who met in plenary sessions, workshops and Bible study groups.
Willy Reimer, executive director of the Canadian conference, said some clarity was gained. But, to a greater degree, unity was gained, which comforted those who worried that the church’s theology was drifting from a scriptural foundation.
“I feel less that we drifted, more that we haven’t restated what [the scriptural foundation] is,” Reimer said. “I think it gave people a significant amount of comfort that we all agree the atonement was substitutionary.
Comments
-
How can the church maintain the atonement as a required belief when there have always been competing theories as to how it works? If it were really true and really important, wouldn't God have made it a simple concept (for simpletons like me), and wouldn't Jesus have made it a key bullet point in his Sermon on the Mount?
-
To what extent was the Canadian MB Conference well attended? Was there representation from all MB churches, coast-to-coast? I wonder how much unity we can expect, in the midst of the diversity we know exists? I also wonder how many people attended this conference who mostly already agree on the atonement debate, whereas others were less likely to attend?
I was surprised to read the heading "Canadian MBs Find Unity on Atonement." Perhaps a more accurate heading would have read, "Although a quorum on atonement was not reached, the outcome was an affirmation of unity in the MB Community." I found the former to be a misleading representation of the text that followed.
-
I am grateful that US MBs were invited to attend this event. Kitchener MB Church and Canadian MBs gave us splendid hospitality. Thanks.
I affirm MB unity based on our reading of the Bible. The biblical story can be outlined as follows: God created a good universe with humans in the image of God. Humans rebelled against God; the relationship with God was broken. God worked through Moses and the prophets to prepare a covenant people who would bless the world. Human rebellion spoiled that plan, ending in exile. Jesus, the Son of God, came to reconcile humanity with God, ending the exile, restoring the people of God to their mission of giving evangelical witness to God's reign. Jesus offered the way to restored relationship through his life, death, and resurrection (what Paul later calls the mystery of God). When it is faithful, the church works in unity to proclaim Jesus as the Lord of God's reign. At the consummation Jesus will return to rule the world with peace and justice. While paradigms and models and theories of atonement may facilitate conversation, the Bible itself does not offer theories. It tells the story and leaves much to mystery. Seeking to understand how the atonement works is not in itself wrong, but it tends to lead us away from the Bible and into human systems of thought. I want to encourage the church to consider moving from the labels and judgments associated with them toward embracing God's act of redemption in Christ. When we are faithful, we will use all of the biblical images as ways of proclaiming that Jesus Christ through his life, death, and resurrection is the only and necessary way to restored relationship with God. Jesus saves us from God's wrath, sin, guilt, evil, shame, slavery, in short, in every way that our brokenness with God is described biblically.
-
So, Lynn Jost, what I hear you saying is that the truth of the atonement is largely mysterious and exists outside of human systems of thought. At the same time, God has given us brains with which to figure stuff out, like how we can best live in harmony with each other and with our environment. Yet these God-given brains should not be applied to comprehending a theological concept like the atonement, because it eludes rational understanding. This would explain why most of humanity has rejected christianity through the centuries, and will probably continue to do so. Largely because so much of what the church puts forth as truth fails to make much sense. And making sense seems to be a reasonable minimal requirement of thoughtful people when considering a particular spiritual path. Thus, according to atonement-touting christians, heaven will be populated by that tiny segment of humanity who were willing to accept, without examination, what they were told by church officials. Sorry, my God-given brain won't let me sign on to that. My world-view is based on the theology-free Sermon on the Mount, and I'm sticking to it.
-
Lynn, thank you for your Biblical comments. The following verifies your comments.
The word ‘atonement’ occurs 69 times in the OT and one time in the NT. In the OT, certain designated animals were sacrificed to die as substitutes to cover the sins of the people of God. It was the blood of animals that was painted over the door posts of God’s people in Egypt so that the Death Angel would Passover all homes who had he blood on the door posts.
The penalty for our sinfulness is death. Romans 6:23 reads, “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
The substitutionary atonement refers to Jesus Christ dying as a substitute for sinners. Jesus Christ died in our place when He was crucified on the cross. We deserved to be the ones placed on that cross to die because we are the ones who live sinful lives. But Christ took the punishment on Himself in our place—He substituted Himself for us and took what we rightly deserved. “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:21).
-
I agree with Matt (November 14). The title of the article leads the reader to believe that evidence of unity will be found in the text. There is none to be found, just a restating of the variety of beliefs. The attendees may have felt unified because they listened to each other, but I fail to see evidence that they rallied around substitutionary atonement other than Willy Reimers's statement that it was so.
Comment on the article Canadian MBs find unity on atonement
Please keep comments civil. MWR editors reserve the right to remove any comment. When posting a comment, you agree to the MWR Comments Policy. Name and comment will be posted; commenters are strongly encouraged to give their full name. Email address is for follow-up only and will not be made public.
Download