Christ's Death For The World

[rkwright]

I wanted to further discuss something that got buried in the infants and original sin thread.

Apo put forward the Eastern Idea that Christ's death was to save all mankind from annihilation. I'll quote the relevant part

[quote]You are limiting salvation to heavenly bliss, which the Eastern Fathers never did, for as St. John Chrysostom indicated in his homilies on 1st Corinthians, the man who is damned ". . . shall not perish in the same way as his works, passing into nought, but he shall abide in the fire" [St. John Chrysostom, Ninth Homily on 1st Corinthians].

I must admit that I cannot understand why you want to limit the power of Christ's work by trying to reduce Him to the savior of only those who have faith in Him. I hold - with scripture - that Christ is the savior of the whole world, "for God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him. He who believes in him is not condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. And this is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does what is true comes to the light, that it may be clearly seen that his deeds have been wrought in God" [John 3:16-21].

Now this very popular scriptural text states quite explicitly that "the world" – and by this it means all mankind – is saved by the Son of God, but it goes on to explain that the gift of salvation is experienced differently by each man, and this experience is determined by a each man's response to God. Those who have faith in Christ (i.e., those who believe in Him) will not be condemned, but will experience the joy of heavenly bliss; while those who do not believe – although still saved by Christ, i.e., saved from falling into non-existence – will suffer punishment. This interpretation of the scriptural texts conforms perfectly to the teaching of St. Athanasios, who explained that, the ". . . transgression of the commandment was turning them [i.e., all men] back to their natural state, so that just as they have had their being out of nothing, so also, as might be expected, they might look for corruption into nothing in the course of time" [St. Athanasios, De Incarnatione, no. 4], and - St. Athanasios went on to say that - in order to stop the "process of dissolution" the Word of God entered into creation to give the gift of incorruptibility to all men [See St. Athanasios, De Incarnatione, nos. 5-9]. [/quote]

Now I have never understood salvation as including those who go to hell - but I concede I am biased from a western upbringing, and concede that I may be wrong.

How do you (Apo) deal with some of the following objections and scriptures? This isn't meant to be an attack, just learning.

1 John 3:14
[quote]14 We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love abides in death.[/quote]
How can one abide in death, in the Eastern understanding, if Christ has abolished death?

Ephesisans 2
[quote] 1 And you he made alive, when you were dead through the trespasses and sins
2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience.
3 Among these we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, following the desires of body and mind, and so we were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.
4 But God, who is rich in mercy, out of the great love with which he loved us,
5 even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
[/quote]
Again if Death means non-existence, how can people be dead once Christ has abolished death.

[Apotheoun]

In human language words are polyvalent.

[quote name='rkwright' date='06 October 2009 - 02:37 PM' timestamp='1254861449' post='1979390']
Now I have never understood salvation as including those who go to hell - but I concede I am biased from a western upbringing, and concede that I may be wrong.

How do you (Apo) deal with some of the following objections and scriptures? This isn't meant to be an attack, just learning.

1 John 3:14
[quote]We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love abides in death.[/quote]
How can one abide in death, in the Eastern understanding, if Christ has abolished death?[/quote]
Scripture, like other written texts, often uses words equivocally.

So the word "life" - in scripture (and in liturgical texts and the Church Fathers) can stand for temporal existence (i.e., the wayfaring state), while it also stands for ever-being (i.e., unending existence), and in some cases ever-well-being (i.e., heavenly glory).

[quote name='rkwright' date='06 October 2009 - 02:37 PM' timestamp='1254861449' post='1979390']
Ephesisans 2
[quote]And you he made alive, when you were dead through the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience. Among these we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, following the desires of body and mind, and so we were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. But God, who is rich in mercy, out of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved).[/quote]
Again if Death means non-existence, how can people be dead once Christ has abolished death.[/quote]
Death does not simply mean "non-existence"; instead, it refers to physical death, while as St. Athanasios said, it also refers to the corruption leading to non-being introduced by the ancestral sin, and which was stayed by the incarnation of the eternal Logos. Death can also refer to the "second death" (i.e., the eternal existence of the damned in hell), while also being personified in the devil, who helped to cause the fall of man in the first place.

Edited October 6, 2009 by Apotheoun

[rkwright]

That argument cuts both ways. Meaning that death could mean simply referring to those who are condemned to hell - not death to non-existence. How is one to tell the difference?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='rkwright' date='06 October 2009 - 07:13 PM' timestamp='1254877999' post='1979549']
That argument cuts both ways. Meaning that death could mean simply referring to those who are condemned to hell - not death to non-existence. How is one to tell the difference?
[/quote]
Alas the scriptures and the Church Fathers clearly use the word "θάνατος" in all the ways that I talked about in my previous post.

[rkwright]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='06 October 2009 - 09:29 PM' timestamp='1254882564' post='1979601']
Alas the scriptures and the Church Fathers clearly use the word "θάνατος" in all the ways that I talked about in my previous post.
[/quote]

Would you mind pointing this out in the original Greek manuscript? Maybe put the english with the Greek translation with the important words bolded... or something to make it clear.

I am fascinated by this view.

I must admit, I am being "won" over to the "Greek side" over time. I like this approach to "salvation history" if you will vs. the west's judicial idea.

I would still like to hear a well reasoned response, say from L_D (Hint hint).

But I still don't know how I feel about the East breaking away from the West... If the West is so "backwards" on its theology why did the East fall into schism... but thats a different issue I'll take on later. Lets just stick to this one.

[dairygirl4u2c]

are you guys essentially talking about the atonement? or is there some connection to it or something that im missing?

the western judicial view of atonement only came by anslem forming it. he was looking for a rational way to explain jesus' death ect. the eastern nonjudicial view is the view of the east and the church as a whole preanslem, 1000ish. though surely there are undertones from early church history that could justify anslem, or he wouldnt have formed his view as he did.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christus_Victor

------------

i like what i read once about jesus' death. none of these versions really do a great job of expaining it, or our reconciliation with God. that's why some say we should just go for an eastern view, as it's more poetic, like a love story. the western view is more 'logical' sounding, but it does have its flaws.

the main thing about the western view that i see is, what does jesus' death do to take back that sin? how does one man's death suffice to appease the punishment of God? people say it's like God came off his seat as judge, and became the person who got the verdict. but it's still arguably a technicality, artificial it didn't do anything to to change the fact that we sinned, and it was unjust to put the punishment on him, arguably.
on the other hand, you could insist that any sin merits infinite punishment which cannot be satisfied by man, so we need an infinite propiation, which jesus' death was. the western view does fulfill then the idea that we need something if we take that theoretical view of 'infinite' combating each other. but, it does still come back to the basic idea against it, in that it's still not changing the fact that we sinned, or doing anything that would make sense to actually fixing anything other than in principle. the 'principle' of the thing is usually something to be afraid of, as man made.

you have the eastern view. jesus conquered death. or, he died so he could send the paraclete, save lost souls in hell or wandering, medically rescue others etc. not sure why he had to die to do these thingsb ut that's just hte way it is. and per conquering death, he did have to die to literally conquer death, at least in a physical sense. if we focus on the resurrection, it seems like that's the understanding that most people have anyway, the good news. not focusing so much on the atonement and a legal exchange.
i know a lot of chrsitian who hesitate when they talk about the blood of jesus acting as legal atonement. it's like those parts in the song where the crowd hesitates etc.

both have a disadvantage of.. why didn't jesus fight back? self defense, anyone would agree that we could use self defense if we've been wrongfully found guilty etc. maybe this point isn't so obvious or true.

Edited October 7, 2009 by dairygirl4u2c

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='07 October 2009 - 05:46 PM' timestamp='1254951995' post='1980257']
are you guys essentially talking about the atonement? or is there some connection to it or something that im missing?

the western judicial view of atonement only came by anslem forming it. he was looking for a rational way to explain jesus' death ect. the eastern nonjudicial view is the view of the east and the church as a whole preanslem, 1000ish. though surely there are undertones from early church history that could justify anslem, or he wouldnt have formed his view as he did.
[/quote]
You're male? When did you reveal this?

[rkwright]

I think this relates to the atonement, but is also based in a basic understanding of what original sin is and how it is transmitted. Its all related.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='07 October 2009 - 05:47 PM' timestamp='1254952033' post='1980258']
You're male? When did you reveal this?
[/quote]

Looks like he is a girl now.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='rkwright' date='07 October 2009 - 06:28 PM' timestamp='1254961730' post='1980404']
I think this relates to the atonement, but is also based in a basic understanding of what original sin is and how it is transmitted. Its all related.
[/quote]
Yes, the two things are connected.

The West and the East view the fall of man (or the failure of man to rise) differently, and that leads to differences in how salvation itself is conceived.

[rkwright]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='07 October 2009 - 07:33 PM' timestamp='1254962027' post='1980412']
Yes, the two things are connected.

The West and the East view the fall of man (or the failure of man to rise) differently, and that leads to differences in how salvation itself is conceived.
[/quote]

Post #5? I'm really interested

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='rkwright' date='07 October 2009 - 06:54 AM' timestamp='1254920043' post='1979796']
Would you mind pointing this out in the original Greek manuscript?
[/quote]
I will try to come up with something that highlights my point that death (thanatos, teleutaō, nekros, etc.) has various shades of meaning in Greek, and that death is often personified (as the devil) in both scripture and patristic tradition.

For example: Death (the masculine noun "θανάτου" is used) - in Acts 2:24 - is personified and Christ is represented as having defeated him (i.e., Death) by His own death and resurrection, here is how scripture puts it:

"But God raised him up, having loosed the pangs of [i]death[/i] (θανάτου), because it was not possible for Him to be held by [i]it[/i] (αὐτοῦ, literally "him", which is referring back to the masculine noun θανάτου)."

And this idea is also powerfully portrayed in the Paschal Liturgy of the Byzantine Church when the hymn "Christ is risen from the dead, by death He trampled death, and to those in the graves He granted life" is sung; and also in the book of Revelations (6:8).

More on this when I have time.

Edited October 8, 2009 by Apotheoun

[N/A Gone]

I dunno why but I love Eastern Theology when it comes to justification type issues.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='07 October 2009 - 08:31 PM' timestamp='1254961869' post='1980407']
Looks like he is a girl now.
[/quote]
Phew! That was scary. I've always thought her SN was kind of cute so I was having a "oh c[color="#000000"]rap[/color], what if I'm ghey?" kind of moment.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='07 October 2009 - 09:20 PM' timestamp='1254968403' post='1980544']
Phew! That was scary. I've always thought her SN was kind of cute so I was having a "oh c[color="#000000"]rap[/color], what if I'm ghey?" kind of moment.
[/quote]



What would Luthein think?!