[Oe List ...] Salmon: The Atonement Dialogue

[ed feldmanis]

Bill, I really appreciate Ken's words.  As someone who has gone throught the
"ManKind weekend" I appreciated their emphasis on accountability,
responsibility and integrity.  In their secular mode they too talk about
what it means to be of service and at "one-ness" ( a part of your
at-one-ment) with all of life.

Ed Feldmanis

On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Otto, Ken <ottok at crcl.net> wrote:

>  Bill,
> I liked the part about not paying much attention to our experiences,
> relationships and emotions and the play on words, At-One-Ment.  This is why
> I so appreciate the focus on getting in touch with my emotions at my
> Mankind's Project, Men's group I attend twice a month.
> Until next time.
> Ken Otto
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net [mailto:oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net]*On
> Behalf Of *Bill Salmon
> *Sent:* Saturday, March 22, 2008 3:16 PM
> *To:* Ecumenical Order
> *Subject:* [Oe List ...] Salmon: The Atonement Dialogue
>
> *Colleagues on the Journey --*
>     Recently, there has been an interesting little dialogue on the topic
> of Atonement theology. This piqued my interest because I am an Atonement
> theologian. This is not so strange to those of us exposed to PLC and RS-I. There
> are two observations I'd liked to add to the conversation.
>     Atonement is nothing more than At-One-Ment; the word is what the
> word does. Consequently, any actions that bring about unity, symphony,
> harmony, interrelationship, peace, etc., become the demonstration of how we
> are to live with our spouse/neighbor, appreciate our own "selves," and
> finally how we respect the Mysterious Power. In this way we fulfill our
> intended purpose of living the humane and gracious life, which, of
> course, fulfills the Divine Commandment touted so clearly by Neibuhr.
>     Anything that is the opposite of this ethic is the antithesis of
> At-One-Ment.
>     In order to keep this context from drifting off into irrelevance, it
> is necessary to connect some Incarnational Theology into it as well. In
> order not to make Incarnational Theology difficult, it only is necessary to
> push every response into its secular experience.
>     "Don't tell me *about* God unless you tell me how you experience God."
>     "Well, God is love."
>     "OK, so when was the last time you were loved."
>     "It was when my wife forgave me for being a damned fool!"
>     "OK, now we are on common ground because I know what a damned fool is,
> because I am one too."
>     In my theology I call this Gut Trip Analysis. I'm never interested in,
> "What do you know?" Rather I'm interested only in, "How do you experience?"
> It never ceases to amaze me how quickly we avoid paying attention to our
> experiences, relationships, and emotions.
>     Then, in order to keep this from drifting off into dilettante-ism it
> is necessary for those living awakened humane and gracious lives to dedicate
> ourselves to working for justice and mercy for all of God's chill'in.
>     What do you think?
>     Inner Peace,
>     Pastor Bill
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OE mailing list
> OE at wedgeblade.net
> http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/oe_wedgeblade.net
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/oe_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20080327/dc617e0f/attachment.html