Atonement theories and debt forgiveness

[Steve Hayes]

I've been seeing a lot in social media recently about the different
responses of some American Christians to the idea of debt forgiveness.

It seems that the difference in the response is linked to the
different atonement theories that people hold, and that the dominant
atonement theory among American Christians is the "penal substitution"
theory.

The following, posted on Facebook, explains why those who hold the
penal substitution theory of the atonement are often vociferously
opposed to debt forgiveness.

-----

Phil Snider
·
Sharing one last thing on debt forgiveness from one of my favorite
theologians, JL Pearl. It’s the best take I’ve seen on this topic thus
far, and is well worth reading:

“Here is my inevitable contribution to the Loan Forgiveness discourse:
tl/dr - American Christian resistance to debt forgiveness isn't
hypocrisy; it is the unironic outworking of American theology.

---

The American Christian resistance to loan forgiveness isn't ironic or
surprising—and not just because American Christianity mostly worships
whiteness and/or capitalism (though that's also true). Rather, it
isn't surprising because there is probably no theological idea that is
more deeply ingrained in American theology than substitutionary
atonement ("Jesus paid it all"). This isn't just a protestant thing. I
was, for example, talking about theology with my Russian Orthodox
sister-in-law, who having lived in the US for like 15 years has so
thoroughly imbibed American theology, that she instinctively
recapitulated substitutionary atonement, despite that not being the
preferred atonement theory of the Orthodox church. Substitutionary
atonement dominates American lay-theology (even if not American
academic theology) across basically every denomination, race, and
class. It is the soil of American theology.

This is particularly relevant in the current debate because, despite
its use of the Biblical language of "forgiveness," NO ONE IS FORGIVEN
under substitutionary atonement. This isn't a rhetorical flourish. I
mean this in the most literal sense. No one, including the "saved"
Christian, is ever forgiven.

This was first pointed out to me by my friend Joe who noted that, at a
most basic level, forgiveness means that there is a debt that needs to
be paid, and the person to whom the debt is owed says: "you don't have
to pay it; it doesn't need to be paid; it is forgiven."

This ISN'T what happens in substitutionary atonement. There, the debt
IS PAID. It just isn't paid by the person who owed the debt. Rather
than being forgiven, the debt is instead transferred to a third party
(Christ). That isn't debt forgiveness that's debt transfer.

Someone might point out that under substitutionary theory, the debt
holder (God) and the payer (Christ) are, ontologically speaking, the
same. But that's irrelevant to the question of forgiveness. For,
nonetheless, God isn't canceling the debt, but paying it; the debt is
still being payed! No one is forgiven.

And so, in the same way, when American Christians hear that economic
debt is being forgiven, they assume that economic debt forgiveness
must work the same way as substitutionary theological forgiveness. If
someone says "forgiveness", they must actually mean "debt transfer."
Thus, you get discourse that says things like "why do I have to pay
for someone else's gender studies degree!?" Here, they see themselves
as the innocent third party (theologically speaking, they see
themselves as Christ) who is paying someone else's debt. Except where
Christ willing did so; they don't. (which is probably the most direct
note of hypocrisy; no cross-taking-up here. But that's a separate
point)

This isn't, despite well-meaning progressive Christian rejoinders, a
simple hypocrisy of those who fail to live up to the message of debt
forgiveness at the heart of the gospel they affirm ("forgive us our
debts as we forgive our debtors"). Rather, the refusal of economic
debt forgiveness—and its replacement by debt transfer—isn't a
hypocritical failure to live up to their theology, it is the direct
enactment of American substitutionary gospel. American Christians
reject debt forgiveness because American Christianity, as a
lay-theology, rejects forgiveness.

In America, no one is forgiven, every debt is paid. No matter how much
suffering or blood is spilt, the debt must be paid.”

------

Some comments:

As an Orthodox Christian myself, I was rather saddened to read in the
article how an Orthodox Christian had been indluenced by the pressure
of the dominant culture to accept at least some of the assumptions of
the penal substitution atonement theory.

I'm not quite sure how many different atonement theories there are,
and there are variations within each of the major types, but I've
written about some of the differences I see between the Orthodox
understanding of the atonement and that of the penal substitution
theory here:

<https://khanya.wordpress.com/2008/06/30/salvation-and-atonement/>

and, if you think a picture is worth a thousand words, and would
prefer the shorter graphic version, see here:

<https://khanya.wordpress.com/2010/12/02/salvation-in-the-orthodox-tradition/>


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com

For information about why crossposting is (usually) good, and multiposting (nearly always) bad, see:
http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm#xpost

[tesla sTinker]

On 9/4/2022 9:59 PM, Steve Hayes scribbled:

> I've been seeing a lot in social media recently about the different
> responses of some American Christians to the idea of debt forgiveness.
>
> It seems that the difference in the response is linked to the
> different atonement theories that people hold, and that the dominant
> atonement theory among American Christians is the "penal substitution"
> theory.
>
> The following, posted on Facebook, explains why those who hold the
> penal substitution theory of the atonement are often vociferously
> opposed to debt forgiveness.
>

"5 These twelve Jesus sent: commanding them, saying: Go ye not into
the way of the Gentiles, and into the city of the Samaritans enter ye
not. 6 But go ye rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 7 And
going, preach, saying: The kingdom of heaven is at hand. 8 Heal the
sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out devils: freely have
you received, freely give. 9 Do not possess gold, nor silver, nor money
in your purses: 10 Nor scrip for your journey, nor two coats, nor shoes,
nor a staff; for the workman is worthy of his meat."

God does not need money.

The true Bible states, after 7 years the church is to forgive the debt.
It also speaks old testament of how much is a legit profit for a
business. And its not to exceed 6 percent a year. From the best I can
understand it. I know, you all ran a runaway train in your sins, and
still do. Its a sin to collect more than the law of the Bible says.
Even today. So, our government is the largest thief on the planet next
to the oil cartel and the phony lawyers... None of them will make it
to Heaven. The Bible is very clear about the eye of the needle and the
Camel. The Rich, they go to hell. No way back. Because they reject
the teaching of Jesus.

[vjp...@at.biostrategist.dot.dot.com]

Both extrtemes are nuts, see the populist paleoconservatives
sites.google.com/site/deplorablepolicyguide the radical millenials
sites.google.com/site/rtdlies A relative born in 1933 tells me the 1930s were
like this, each extreme did their best to get under the skin of the other,
spinning centrifugally to ever more destruction. I fear WW3 is inevitable

--
Vasos Panagiotopoulos panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---

[Steve Hayes]

On Mon, 19 Sep 2022 16:13:50 -0000 (UTC),
vjp...@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com wrote:

> Both extrtemes are nuts, see the populist paleoconservatives
>sites.google.com/site/deplorablepolicyguide the radical millenials
>sites.google.com/site/rtdlies A relative born in 1933 tells me the 1930s were
>like this, each extreme did their best to get under the skin of the other,
>spinning centrifugally to ever more destruction. I fear WW3 is inevitable

Both extremes of what?

People in favour or opposed to debt forgiveness?

Or people in favour of or opposed to a particular atonement theory?

[tesla sTinker]

Its not a theory, Its a precept Law of Almighty God. And to be obeyed
in the true Church. More is in new testament, this is the old
testament. Usury is a mortal sin. And not part of the church. The
curse is below

https://truecarpentry.org/tccwww/cathwww/dogma/catholicbooks/HolyBible/2esdras.htm#chpt5


13 Moreover I shook my lap, and said: So may God shake every man that
shall not accomplish this word, out of his house, and out of his
labours, thus may he be shaken out, and become empty. And all the
multitude said: Amen. And they praised God. And the people did according
to what was said.

And the ones that are opposed, as of what you write below, are not
Christians at all. And are very thrown out of God's Temple. So you
see, you have a bunch of fakers in the world, that tell you lots of
lies. Read the whole chapter.

On 9/4/2022 9:59 PM, Steve Hayes scribbled: