Seriously, check it out. If you get this, you'll never look at the universe the same again.

This article that I ran across is just too good to keep to myself. I'm actually going to do something I've never done before: type up the article word-for-word so that you can read it for yourself rather than reading my comments about it without having read the actual article.
Just as a short intro, though: This is a subject that most people probably don't consider. As Christians, we're brought up believing that Jesus came to pay for our sins so that we wouldn't have to. He took all of God's wrath upon Himself. So my question lately has been, "If God's wrath has been satisfied, how come the bible talks of wrath to come? (i.e. Revelation, etc.)" It just doesn't match up. But I was asking a question that has its root in another more fundamental question: What exactly did Christ accomplish on the cross and in His resurrection?What was it all about? What did that DO to the universe and to humanity?
The technical term for what Christ did on the cross is: "the nature of the atonement". Many of you have probably heard this term and are familiar with different opinions on the nature of the atonement. When a person asks, "what is the nature of the atonement?" Much of the answer is actually in the question, since the word "atonement" means "At-one-ment", or making something one, or reconciled.

So without further ado:

"Where is it Written? Understanding the Cross and the Church's Ministry of Love"
by Michelle Clifton-Soderstrom

"Perhaps the most well-known [Evangelical] Covenant adage is Paul Peter Waldenstrom's question, "Where is it written?" The question has served as the criteria for doctrine in the Covenant Church and originally emerged as a response to the comment, 'How wonderful it is that God is reconciled!'

"At face value, this comment seems innocuous--too cursory to raise flags or warrent much response. Furthermore, the theology behind the statement was acceptable, representing the idea that Jesus's death appeased an angry God. Popular still today, this view--called penal substitution--suggests that humans have accrued a debt of sin so immense that only God Himself can pay it. So, God sends Jesus Christ who serves our sentence for crimes against God and humanity, substituting His own death on the cross for a death that was rightly ours.

"While it was common parlance for both clergy and laity to speak of an angry God as being reconciled through Christ's death, Waldenstrom (1838-1917) was not convinced of the scriptural basis for this view of atonement. Originally referring to "at-one-ment," the doctrine of atonement is that area of theology that talks about restoring broken relationships with God. Theologies of the atonement ask such questions as: How is reconciliation with God achieved? How does God's saving action in Christ restore us to covenant relationship? How does God work in Christ to save sinners? Amidst these questions, the doctrine of the atonement seeks to understand the cross and death of Christ in light of a good Father, a sinless Son, and the church's ministry of love.

"As a pastor and scholar, Waldenstrom was not persuaded that hte penal substitution view answered such questions in a way that represented God, Jesus Christ, and humanity as revealed in Scripture. As a result, he launched a two-year Bible study that left us with not only a good denominational slogan [i.e. "Where is it written?" is the motto of the Evangelical Covenant Church] but a biblical account of the atonement that Covenanters continue to hold dear.

"At the time Waldenstrom took up his study of scripture, two important influences were in play: the renewal movements and the view of penal substitution. The renewal movements in Sweden (which eventually gave birth to the Covenant Church) experienced their faith in terms of a heavenly Father who was moved by love and who would do all that was necessary to reconcile Himself and humanity. The story of the prodigal son was a cherished text, and these movements emphasized the Father, not the Son, as the central character in the story.

"The faith experience of these groups set the stage for Waldenstrom to question the view of penal substitution, which assumes that humans owe a debt for their sin. Because we are incapable of paying such a debt, we are charged with a crime punishable by death and Jesus Christ takes our place from there. Waldenstrom considered the idea that God needed to be repaid or appeased a heathen one because it not only painted a picture of God as cruel, it also was articulated in terms of human legal systems. Most importantly, Waldenstrom thought the view of penal substitution was absent from the biblical account, so he took up a study of Scripture.

"Waldenstrom summed up his study of the atonement in the following five theses:
1) The fall of humanity into sin occasioned no change in the disposition of God.
2) It was neither God's wrath nor vindictiveness toward us after the fall that blocked the way of salvation
3) The change brough about by our fall into sin occurred only in humanity, in the sense that we became sinful and therefore separated from God.
4) We therefore needed reconciliation but not for the purpose of appeasing God's wrath in order to render God merciful; rather to blot out and take away our sin so as to render us righteous again.
5) Jesus Christ accomplished this reconciliation

"From Waldenstrom's study of Scripture, two distinctive emphases emerged:
1) the atonement is to blot out sin, or to sanctify sinners from their sins, and
2) the atonement is the reconciliation of sinners to God.

"First, Scripture teaches that Christ's death was an atoning sacrifice. Nowhere, according to Waldenstrom, does Scripture say that God's justice demands punishment for sin to be forgiven. In fact, payment at all for the debt of sin is foreign to Scripture. The debt of sin can be forgiven, but it cannot be repaid. Further, the idea that Christ had to be punished for us, in our stead, had no biblical basis, according to Waldenstrom. Sacrifice, as it was practiced in the Old Testament, had both the function of expressing gratitude and for reconciliation.

"In terms of reconciliation, the Old Testament makes clear that it is the blood, or source of life, that effects atonement rather than the actual death of the sacrificed animal. In fact, on the Day of Atonement, the laying on of hands as an act of confession occurred not on the animal that was to be killed, but on the goat that was to be kept alive (Lev. 16:20-23). The live goat bears on itself all the sins of the people of Israel and is in the end set free in the wilderness. Importantly, Waldenstrom notes that the atoning work is not explicitly linked to the suffering and death but to the life that the blood represents.

"In the New Testament, Christ's atoning sacrifice takes the character of the priestly office. The blood of Jesus as High Priest, as John 1 says, cleanses and purifies us from all sin. Hebrews 9-10 brings us further into the priestly reality of the blood of Christ, for it is Christ's blood--in contrast to that of goats and bulls--that cleanses us. This perfect sacrificial blood--which has the power to forgive--is offered by Christ Himself. The writer of Hebrews thus declares, "How much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from the dead works to worship the living God!" (Hebrews 9:14). For this reason, it follows that Christ is the mediator of the new covenant, and the shedding of His blood serves not as payment for our debt but rather as the forgiveness of our sins.

"The atoning sacrifice of Christ leads to Waldenstrom's second emphasis, namely that the work of Christ reconciles humanity to God and not vice-versa. Waldenstrom rejected any notion that God's wrath was appeased in the death of Christ, and, further, that Jesus was a substitution who stood in as a shield against God or "a lightning rod for His wrath." Waldenstrom's study of Scripture concluded that no change took place in God's disposition and, therefore, that humanity, not God, was reconciled through Christ's death on the cross.

"The striking element in this conclusion is the depth of God's love for humanity. Such a love is neither improved or diminished because it is already perfect. First John 3:16 says that we know God's love because Jesus laid down His life for us. we are able to percieve the depth of God's love because Christ's death reconciles us--it changes us so that we may receive it, precisely through the power and depth of God's forgiving love. Such a love does not need to be restored because it was never lost, and this is great cause for celebration.

"Waldenstrom's vision of God was not only scriptural; it also found its way into the hearts and faith of the early revival of the Covenant. His study showed a God who directs His love toward restoring sinners to a state in which they can perceive and receive the gift of God's love. It reveals a God intent on bringing sinners back to Himself and a story that works to transform people of faith. Waldenstrom exclaims, 'Oh! How dear and precious to your heart you will find God to be when you thus behold Him in Christ. Because in Christ you have the true manifestation of Him.'

"Jesus' ministry was not a message of punishment and wrath; rather, His message was one of friendship and love. If we are to understand God's atoning work within the priestly office of Christ, it radically shifts the understanding of the cross as punishment to an understanding of the cross as a gift to the sinner that shows God's love for us in spite of sin. The cross as a gift just might allow us to see the pain and death around us without completely turning inward--without destroying ourselves in the process. And it is precisely this--the strength to look around and find Christ in our suffering brothers and sisters--that empowers us to participate in Christ's mission on earth. Waldenstrom reminds us that the highest aim of all that the church says and does is the glorification of Christ. This should both relieve us and excite us."

note: I left out the last paragraph which just relates Waldenstrom's work to the current Evangelical Covenant Church, which is less important than the actual doctrine preached by Waldenstrom, which I wanted to make known to you.

My comments:
At first, my thought was that there is such a subtle difference between the doctrine of penal substitution and Waldenstrom's view of atonement that it hardly mattered which one you believe. But though it may be a subtle difference, it changes everything about every other doctrine that the church holds dear. For one thing, I love the line, "Such a love does not need to be restored because it was never lost..." since it gets at the heart of it all. God never stopped loving humanity, even when we fell.
Also, I dare anyone to find a church where penal substitution is preached that is not legalistic. Every church I have ever been a part of that upheld this doctrine has been full of legalistic people. Why? Because the idea of penal substitution is based on the idea that we must appease God. And even though they technically believe that Jesus was our substitute, they still believe that every time they sin, God becomes angry/frustrated with them. So they live bound to rules and regulations, and forget that it was, "for freedom that Christ has set [us] free!" (the words of Paul).
The enemy really has the church wound up, doesn't he? After all, what better way to corrupt the gospel than to change it in such a way that it seems to match up with scripture, but actually doesn't? This doesn't mean the gospel becomes null and void because it is preached incorrectly, it just means that people aren't going to understand it properly, and therefore, they won't understand God properly. If you don't understand WHAT God did, you can't understand WHY, which means you can't understand WHO He is.

Jesus said, "Love your enemies and bless those who curse you," and yet, those who view the atonement as a penal substitution are forced to believe that God Himself does not "practice what He preaches," since He doesn't love His enemies, but rather takes revenge/justice (whichever term you prefer) on them by sending them to a place of eternal conscious torment AKA Hell.
Even though the idea that we must pay for our sins is more Catholic than scriptural, most Christians still believe that if a person doesn't believe in Jesus, then His work on the cross doesn't count for them, and they must pay for their own sins. How a lifetime of sinning equals an eternity of punishment, I don't know, I guess you have to believe that I am more merciful than God, because I would never torment my worst enemy for all of eternity. Perhaps I'd punish them long enough to pay off the debt they owe me, but more than that would be cruelty and hatred. Am I more loving than God? By no means!

The Gospel preached today is this:
"Repent and believe in Jesus Christ, and you will be saved!
and be baptised and prove that you have the Holy Spirit by speaking in tongues. And join the church to keep from forsaking the fellowship of believers, and don't hang out with non-Christians so you won't backslide. If you don't believe in Jesus (and do all these things--depending on which denomination you are evangelizing for) you will suffer for all eternity in a terrible place called Hell!"

The true Gospel:
"Repent and belive, for you have been reconciled to God by Jesus Christ, His Son!"

The Gospel preached today: "God did it. I believe it. That settles it."
The true Gospel: "God did it. That settles it--whether you believe it or not."