Kaleidoscopic view of atonement

So I had a brain fog moment and, even worse, forgot to take a note on where the kaleidoscopic view of atonement theories originated. I read it in a book in my home library. Does anyone remember going over this view in any of their studies? I searched in Logos but could not find anything. kaleidoscopic NEAR atonement

Find more posts tagged with

Desktop App

Comments

Sean

It's this one:

https://www.logos.com/product/157851/the-nature-of-the-atonement-four-views

Note that this isn't a proper theory; it's one author's attempt at a fusion of views. I doubt you'll encounter that specific name in any significant way anywhere else, though of course others have attempted similar fusions.

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1276846#Comment_1276846

it's one author's attempt at a fusion of views. I doubt you'll encounter that specific name in any significant way anywhere else,

simply selecting "caleidoscopic view" from that resource and running a book search from the selection menu yields 32 books in my library, so it does occur not infrequently, but you are right in that they nearly all refer back to Joel Green and most cite his contribution in "The Nature of Atonement". However, he is not alone in promoting the idea that there is no "one atonement theory to rule them all". As per Adam J. Johnson:

Scot McKnight, Mark Baker, and Joel Green (among others) have advanced accounts of the atonement that refer to an abundance of theories, explanations, or metaphors for the work of Christ, using such images as a bag of golf clubs or a kaleidoscope. (...) The premise of the present work, developed at length in Atonement: A Guide for the Perplexed, is that nothing but the diversity proper to the life of the triune God in the fullness of his divine attributes will account for the diversity inherent within the doctrine of Christ’s saving work.

Adam J. Johnson, The Reconciling Wisdom of God: Reframing the Doctrine of the Atonement, ed. Michael F. Bird, Snapshots (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016), 102–103. https://ref.ly/logosres/rcnclngwsdtnmnt?ref=Page.p+102-103&off=895&ctx=ches+and+diversity.+~Scot+McKnight%2c+Mark+

Christian Alexander

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1276876#Comment_1276876

Thanks everyone. I am a bit baffled as to how a kaleidoscopic viewpoint of atonement can function within the sphere of atonement theories. I do not get how this one theory can make a whole viewpoint. Does this view take on many bits of different theories to come to a conclusion?

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1277219#Comment_1277219

I revert to a Buddhist maxim - look at the moon not the finger pointing to it. Imagine several people all looking at the issue of atonement from their perspective and providing the best theological explanation that they can. None of them have it absolutely perfectly right ... but they are all pointing to the single reality ... look at where the theories are pointing.

EastTN

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1277245#Comment_1277245

If you haven't already read it, I found John Stott's The Cross of Christ very helpful in synthesizing the various different aspects of the atonement and putting the different "theories of atonement" into perspective.