SUBSCRIBER LOGIN

Search
First Things

Loading

RSS

Masthead

Recent Comments

  • teleologist: Thanks you for the opportunity to express our opinions with the time that we had. Tongues will cease,...
  • Orthodoxdj: As Tolkien said to Lewis as they parted on that fateful night in Oxford, “Goodbye.”
  • Livingston Dell: I didn’t always comment as frequently as I had liked to on these articles, but I always...
  • Nikolai Volk: You know, we had a hell of a run in these comment sections. I’ve had many a great discussion with...
  • David Strunk: Hey Joe, I also appreciated what you guys did here, and always had this blog on my RSS feed to see the...
  • Amy K. Hall: Thanks for starting the blog, Joe. It was an honor to be included.
  • Archives

    Categories

    Monthly


    « Previous  |Home|  Next »         

    Wednesday, December 9, 2009, 9:59 PM

    Ok.  I’ve got some questions about Christmas.  Think of this as a little survey.

    1.  Do you find yourself talking (teaching/preaching) of the atonement more, less, or about the same during the Christmas season?

    2.  Do you find a greater, lesser, or unchanged emphasis on evangelism during the Christmas season.

    3.  Likewise, do you see Christ’s birth as the beginning, something incidental to, or as a part of Christ’s work, the atonement?

    5 Comments

      Jason
      December 9th, 2009 | 10:54 pm | #1

      1 – I probably preach a little less on the atonement during Christmas and focus on the incarnation. That’s not to say, however, that I neglect the atonement–it is essential to any gospel proclamation.

      2 – I think that evangelism receives a lesser emphasis during Christmas, at least in my neck of the woods.

      3 – I think that the incarnation is a part of the atonement.

      Jake Meador
      December 9th, 2009 | 11:53 pm | #2

      1) About the same.
      2) About the same… maybe greater. Hard to say. If it leans one way or the other, I’d have to say it leans toward greater.
      3) It’s part of, though I’d bust out the redemptive historical argument at this point and say both incarnation and atonement are distinct pegs in the larger redemptive narrative of Scripture. So if we frame it as terminating on the atonement, we’re missing the whole picture.

      Jeff Doles
      December 10th, 2009 | 9:25 am | #3

      I see the incarnation as a necessary part of the atonement. So, focus on the meaning of the incarnation leads naturally to discussion of the atonement. Bringing the good news of the incarnation->atonement … that is evangelism.

      Steve
      December 10th, 2009 | 9:25 am | #4

      They’re interesting questions, especially since we’re doing a teaching series on repentance (so, perhaps a little more involved than just atonement, but nonetheless a topic often overlooked). Many in our class have been clear that they see little–or no–need for repentance in their lives because of the atonement. They repented at conversion (knowing Christ’s atoning work), but wouldn’t consider it anything necessary afterwards. It struck us as a bit odd.

      To your third question, I’ve always told students (and, frankly, anyone else who would listen) that you cannot have Easter without Christmas. Atonement is impossible (and Christ’s sacrifice on the cross is nothing more than a brutal martyrdom) if he isn’t first God. That’s why the central theme of Christianity–even before Christ’s death and resurrection–is Christ’s nature as both God and man. Without this as a starting point, Christ’s mission never gets going.

      Dave B.
      December 10th, 2009 | 10:26 am | #5

      1. Atonement is always in the mix. During Advent and Christmas the approach I take is usually more about understanding, embracing, and celebrating the salvation Christ brings.

      2. This is a fantastic time for inviting and welcoming others. There is a special opportunity Christmas affords.

      3. No incarnation, no atonement.

    Links

    Blogs

    Find Us

    Contact