Progressive Disenchantment Atonement

[MWinther]

Your thesis rests on a key assumption that is quite false, namely, that once Christianity rejects the divinization of nature, the material world is left “ontologically empty” or "disenchanted". That does not follow. Understanding the truth does not lead inexorably to errors such as "nihilism, moral dissolution, hedonistic self‑absorption, and political idolatry." Such things are not a result of accepting the Christian (i.e. the biblical) worldview, but of rejecting it.

Nietzsche claimed that Christianity is nihilism, and he was half right. The Christian movement of alienation and disenchantment divides into two paths: nihilism and heavenly participation. It is clear from Jesus' message that he opens the way to both heaven and hell.

There is a clear distinction between saying that the world is not divine and saying that the world is devoid of meaning. Christianity affirms the former but definitely does not affirm the latter.

I have never claimed that the world is devoid of meaning. My argument is meant to counter both nihilism and hedonism. We are called to participate in the heavenly kingdom.

Reframing the problem as unmet participatory longing shifts the discussion away from objective reality and toward the management of subjective experience.

You adopt the modern, worldly perspective, but from a narrative or mythopoetic standpoint this inevitably flattens the Christian cosmos. It marks a radical departure from historic Christianity.

Heaven has been all but forgotten today. The notion that heavenly daimones and angeloi function as intermediaries in the Neoplatonic sense is integral to Christianity; it is already present in Paul. In modernity, however, and especially with the Reformers, the angelic hierarchy was effectively collapsed. God came to be understood as relating to creation directly, without mediating beings, and in a more causal‑mechanical fashion. This stands in tension with ancient Christianity's emphasis on participation, providence, and a graded order of mediation. Both Testaments assume a cosmos structured by angelic mediators.

Nicaea still allows for participatory, angelic mediation, while Christ alone embodies ontological mediation. Over time, however, the participatory dimension faded from view, and Christians came to rely almost exclusively on ontological mediation in the Eucharist, where mediation functions chiefly in a therapeutic register.

The proposed solution, especially the appeal to sacramental life as a structured and “non-idolatrous” form of participation effectively reestablishes a mediated system through which access to the divine is regulated and experienced.

On the contrary, I argue that the sacramental life plays no direct role in salvation. It does, however, have a therapeutic function and protects against the devil's worldly allurements.

Further, the distinction between “horizontal” and “vertical” participation attempts to avoid paganism, yet it still operates within the same basic category, namely, that the human goal is participation in the sacred as an experiential or ontological state.

What you dismiss is precisely the position of the Church Fathers, including Paul, who employ participatory language to emphasize the heavenly hierarchy.

Finally, the claim that Christ’s redemptive work constitutes a “cosmic disenchantment” mischaracterizes the nature of redemption itself. Redemption does not strip the world of false sacrality only to leave it empty while pointing elsewhere for meaning.

Central to Christ's message is the kingdom of God, a reality that is not of this world.

 

[MWinther]

So God is stuck inside the toilet, eh? Sounds a lot like Calvinistic gobbledygook to me..

According to Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory Nazianzen, and Pseudo‑Dionysius divine presence is veiled to allow creatures to exist as creatures. Aquinas and Bonaventure both teach that Creation requires a kind of divine reticence. In Luther's theology God's hiddenness is necessary for faith and for the world's continued existence.

According to Jürgen Moltmann, Creation is possible only through divine self‑limitation. God "contracts" himself to make room for Creation, and history unfolds within God's self‑withdrawn space. The New Testament already contains a proto‑withdrawal concept. According to Paul, Christ "emptied himself" in the act of Incarnation. Kenosis is interpreted by many theologians as a form of divine self‑limitation.

 

[Right Divider]

Nietzsche claimed that Christianity is nihilism, and he was half right.

Nietzsche was anti-Christian... so he was 100% wrong.

Central to Christ's message is the kingdom of God, a reality that is not of this world.

Pure mythology. We all notice that you frequently make claims about what the Bible says without using the Bible. Your opinions about what the Bible says don't move us. We need quotes and solid arguments.

 

[MWinther]

Thanks for the non-answer.

You have some weird mythological timeline of the world. There is no such thing as "pagan times".

Again... DEFINE what it means that "The divine is now absent from the world" and WHEN that occurred.

Hint: It's not true and never happened.

Here are some more hints for you:

• Christianity did not begin on the day of Pentecost.
• Paul was the first member of the body of Christ, i.e., God's church for today.
• Christianity as we know it today is a Pauline construct created by Jesus Christ.
• Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were not written about Christianity, but about the fulfillment of prophecy related to the nation of Israel and their covenant relationship with God.
• All believers since Paul have been indwelt by the Holy Spirit (God).
• We are the temple of the Holy Spirit (God).

I am not denying the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. That indwelling is vertical participation, the ascent of the creature towards the transcendent God, and it is central to my argument. Nothing in my position contradicts Paul's teaching that the Spirit dwells in the believer. The question at stake is not whether God is present to the person, but whether the world is experienced as saturated with divine presence.

When I say that "the divine is now absent from the world," I am not making a metaphysical claim about God's non‑existence or withdrawal in a literal, spatial sense. I am describing a shift in the human mode of perception, a transformation in how the world is experienced and interpreted. In antiquity (pagan, Jewish, and early Christian alike) the cosmos was perceived as alive with spiritual forces, angelic mediators, daimones, powers, and principalities. This is not controversial; it is the worldview assumed throughout Scripture.

But modernity has undergone a profound cognitive and cultural disenchantment. We no longer project divine agency onto the world. We no longer interpret storms, plagues, fertility, or political events as the work of gods or angels. We inhabit a scientific worldview in which nature is governed by impersonal laws, not by spiritual intermediaries. This is not a theological judgment; it is a sociological and phenomenological fact.

My interlocutors in the thread respond as though I were claiming that God has literally vacated creation, or that the Spirit no longer indwells believers. But my claim concerns the structure of experience, not the metaphysical status of God. The world has become transparent to natural causality and opaque to divine presence. That is what "disenchantment" means.

This shift is not merely cultural; it is theological. Christianity itself, especially in its monotheistic, anti‑idolatrous impulse, abolished the pagan intuition of a world filled with gods. It relocated the divine from the immanent cosmos to the transcendent realm. As I noted earlier, Christianity "marks the abolition of that worldview and the turn towards a transcendent perspective." However, the Reformers undermined also the transcendent perspective by flattening the angelic hierarchy and rejecting mediating beings, leaving only the direct relation between God and the believer.

Thus, when I say "the divine is now absent from the world," I mean: We no longer perceive the world as enchanted. This is not atheism. It is the metaphysical prerequisite for creaturely independence. The world is disenchanted because God is transcendent. And God is transcendent so that creatures may exist as creatures.

Vertical participation remains. Horizontal participation, finding God in nature, matter, or events, has been abolished.

 

[MWinther]

Nietzsche was anti-Christian... so he was 100% wrong.

Pure mythology. We all notice that you frequently make claims about what the Bible says without using the Bible. Your opinions about what the Bible says don't move us. We need quotes and solid arguments.

When questioned by Pilate, Jesus declares: "My kingdom is not of this world" (John 18:36). Christ's kingdom is not embedded in the immanent order. It is a transcendent reality, accessed through vertical participation.

This is precisely why the modern, disenchanted worldview, where nature is understood through impersonal laws rather than divine intermediaries, does not contradict Christianity. Christ himself relocates divine presence away from the world's immanent structures and into the heavenly realm. The kingdom is not "here" in the sense of being woven into the fabric of nature; it is "here" only insofar as the Spirit indwells believers and draws them upwards into participation with the transcendent God.

Thus, when I say that "the divine is now absent from the world," I am simply taking Jesus at his word. The kingdom is not of this world. Divine presence is not projected onto nature. It is encountered vertically, through the Spirit, prayer, and the life of the Church.

 

[Right Divider]

I am not denying the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. That indwelling is vertical participation, the ascent of the creature towards the transcendent God, and it is central to my argument. Nothing in my position contradicts Paul's teaching that the Spirit dwells in the believer. The question at stake is not whether God is present to the person, but whether the world is experienced as saturated with divine presence.

What is "the world"?

When I say that "the divine is now absent from the world," I am not making a metaphysical claim about God's non‑existence or withdrawal in a literal, spatial sense. I am describing a shift in the human mode of perception, a transformation in how the world is experienced and interpreted. In antiquity (pagan, Jewish, and early Christian alike) the cosmos was perceived as alive with spiritual forces, angelic mediators, daimones, powers, and principalities. This is not controversial; it is the worldview assumed throughout Scripture.

I'm not sure what you even mean by "the worldview assumed throughout Scripture"... assumed by whom?

But modernity has undergone a profound cognitive and cultural disenchantment.

Again, you sound like a new-ager.

We no longer project divine agency onto the world. We no longer interpret storms, plagues, fertility, or political events as the work of gods or angels.

Those that believed God throughout Biblical history never believed any of those things.

We inhabit a scientific worldview

Nonsensical language.

You're going to have to do better.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I am not denying the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. That indwelling is vertical participation, the ascent of the creature towards the transcendent God, and it is central to my argument. Nothing in my position contradicts Paul's teaching that the Spirit dwells in the believer. The question at stake is not whether God is present to the person, but whether the world is experienced as saturated with divine presence.

When I say that "the divine is now absent from the world," I am not making a metaphysical claim about God's non‑existence or withdrawal in a literal, spatial sense. I am describing a shift in the human mode of perception, a transformation in how the world is experienced and interpreted. In antiquity (pagan, Jewish, and early Christian alike) the cosmos was perceived as alive with spiritual forces, angelic mediators, daimones, powers, and principalities. This is not controversial; it is the worldview assumed throughout Scripture.

But modernity has undergone a profound cognitive and cultural disenchantment. We no longer project divine agency onto the world. We no longer interpret storms, plagues, fertility, or political events as the work of gods or angels. We inhabit a scientific worldview in which nature is governed by impersonal laws, not by spiritual intermediaries. This is not a theological judgment; it is a sociological and phenomenological fact.

My interlocutors in the thread respond as though I were claiming that God has literally vacated creation, or that the Spirit no longer indwells believers. But my claim concerns the structure of experience, not the metaphysical status of God. The world has become transparent to natural causality and opaque to divine presence. That is what "disenchantment" means.

This shift is not merely cultural; it is theological. Christianity itself, especially in its monotheistic, anti‑idolatrous impulse, abolished the pagan intuition of a world filled with gods. It relocated the divine from the immanent cosmos to the transcendent realm. As I noted earlier, Christianity "marks the abolition of that worldview and the turn towards a transcendent perspective." However, the Reformers undermined also the transcendent perspective by flattening the angelic hierarchy and rejecting mediating beings, leaving only the direct relation between God and the believer.

Thus, when I say "the divine is now absent from the world," I mean: We no longer perceive the world as enchanted. This is not atheism. It is the metaphysical prerequisite for creaturely independence. The world is disenchanted because God is transcendent. And God is transcendent so that creatures may exist as creatures.

Vertical participation remains. Horizontal participation, finding God in nature, matter, or events, has been abolished.

You’re equivocating between pagan enchantment and biblical providence. Christianity does abolish the idea that nature is full of gods. It does not abolish the truth that creation is full of God’s glory, governed by His providence, upheld by His power, and interpreted rightly only in relation to Him. Calling that “horizontal participation” and declaring it abolished is not biblical theology; it is modern disenchantment baptized in theological jargon.

 

[Right Divider]

When questioned by Pilate, Jesus declares: "My kingdom is not of this world" (John 18:36).

You need to read a little more carefully. I know that many people make this bogus claim (that the "kingdom" is "just a spiritual kingdom").

John 18:36 (AKJV/PCE)​

(18:36) Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.​

Notice the TIME ELEMENT there? But NOW ...

After Jesus gave the disciples a FORTY DAY training course on "the things pertaining to the kingdom of God"... what did they ask?

Acts 1:6 (AKJV/PCE)​

(1:6) When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? ​

They were not stupid... they had just been trained by the Lord Jesus Christ (for FORTY DAYS).

Christ's kingdom is not embedded in the immanent order. It is a transcendent reality, accessed through vertical participation.

Apparently, you've not read much of the Bible. God promised Israel a kingdom on the earth and Jesus will be the King of that kingdom. The gospel of the kingdom was a statement of the fact that this kingdom was about to be established for Israel... i.e., the kingdom of priests, the holy nation.

This is precisely why the modern, disenchanted worldview, where nature is understood through impersonal laws rather than divine intermediaries, does not contradict Christianity.

The laws of the universe are not really "impersonal". A person created them... three persons actually.

Christ himself relocates divine presence away from the world's immanent structures and into the heavenly realm.

"Relocates"... nonsense.

The kingdom is not "here" in the sense of being woven into the fabric of nature; it is "here" only insofar as the Spirit indwells believers and draws them upwards into participation with the transcendent God.

The gospel of the kingdom is about a kingdom on the earth.

Matt 6:10 (AKJV/PCE)​

(6:10) Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as [it is] in heaven.​

Thus, when I say that "the divine is now absent from the world," I am simply taking Jesus at his word.

No, you are not. You are expressing a myth that you've fallen for hook, line and sinker.

The kingdom is not of this world.

NOW (at that time) it was "not of this world"... but when it is actually established... it will be on earth (as it is in heaven).

Divine presence is not projected onto nature. It is encountered vertically, through the Spirit, prayer, and the life of the Church.

 

[MWinther]

You need to read a little more carefully. I know that many people make this bogus claim (that the "kingdom" is "just a spiritual kingdom").

John 18:36 (AKJV/PCE)​

(18:36) Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.​

Notice the TIME ELEMENT there? But NOW ...

After Jesus gave the disciples a FORTY DAY training course on "the things pertaining to the kingdom of God"... what did they ask?

Acts 1:6 (AKJV/PCE)​

(1:6) When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? ​

They were not stupid... they had just been trained by the Lord Jesus Christ (for FORTY DAYS).


Apparently, you've not read much of the Bible. God promised Israel a kingdom on the earth and Jesus will be the King of that kingdom. The gospel of the kingdom was a statement of the fact that this kingdom was about to be established for Israel... i.e., the kingdom of priests, the holy nation.

The laws of the universe are not really "impersonal". A person created them... three persons actually.

"Relocates"... nonsense.

The gospel of the kingdom is about a kingdom on the earth.

Matt 6:10 (AKJV/PCE)​

(6:10) Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as [it is] in heaven.​

No, you are not. You are expressing a myth that you've fallen for hook, line and sinker.

NOW (at that time) it was "not of this world"... but when it is actually established... it will be on earth (as it is in heaven).

Indeed, the kingdom of God is eschatological. It will become our new homeland at the end of the age, but for now it exists as a heavenly realm.

 

[MWinther]

You’re equivocating between pagan enchantment and biblical providence. Christianity does abolish the idea that nature is full of gods. It does not abolish the truth that creation is full of God’s glory, governed by His providence, upheld by His power, and interpreted rightly only in relation to Him. Calling that “horizontal participation” and declaring it abolished is not biblical theology; it is modern disenchantment baptized in theological jargon.

These are mere words, serving a therapeutic purpose at best. Or will you argue, with radical Reformed theologians, that God's glorious governance finds expression in the Holocaust, the Holodomor, the mass starvations under Mao, and the world wars with their millions of victims?

 

[JudgeRightly]

Indeed, the kingdom of God is eschatological. It will become our new homeland at the end of the age,

No.

The Kingdom preached by Christ and His disciples will be the new homeland of Israel.

We, the Body of Christ, have our residence in heaven.

but for now it exists as a heavenly realm.

 

[JudgeRightly]

These are mere words, serving a therapeutic purpose at best. Or will you argue, with radical Reformed theologians, that God's glorious governance finds expression in the Holocaust, the Holodomor, the mass starvations under Mao, and the world wars with their millions of victims?

You’re confusing providence with approval. God governing history does not mean every evil act is morally endorsed by God. Joseph’s brothers meant evil; God meant good. Judas sinned; God ordained the crucifixion. Your objection only works if biblical providence is flattened into “whatever happens is automatically glorious in itself.” That is not my view, and it is not Scripture’s view.

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

According to Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory Nazianzen, and Pseudo‑Dionysius...Luther...Jürgen Moltmann...

Ok well these people aren't here right now, I'm asking you. Is God inside the toilet when I go to the bathroom, yes or no?

If you're having trouble answering such a rudimentary question clearly (the answer is "No", btw) you might want to reconsider whatever it is you think qualifies you to know that a new "atonement model" is needed for Christianity.

I argue that the sacramental life plays no direct role in salvation. It does, however, have a therapeutic function and protects against the devil's worldly allurements.

I'm trying to find some common ground here. It would help if you could just speak plainly. Would you consider the celebration of Christmas a part of "sacramental life"? Because there are extra-biblical traditions held by Christian cultures that I think are good for us to have. For example Muslims go to "church" at night, because they worship Satan but Christians typically go to worship in the morning. This seems to me as it should be. And I think it's good for us to celebrate Christmas, even though the Bible doesn't tell us that Jesus was born on the 25th of December. And yes I would even go as far as to say that Christmas serves a therapeutic function. I'm happy and singing all day, every Christmas. Who doesn't love Christmas?

I remember a time when it seemed most Christian families would have a cross on the wall, in view of their dinner table. I sorta wish we still did this. I guess the sign of the early Church was a fish, or sometimes two fish. I think that was pretty cool too. But these aren't things that should be mandated. Who of us would even have the authority to do so? Likewise we certainly do not have the authority to require new sacraments or "atonement models" or celestial hierarchies of mediation or any such nonsense. You are going way overboard. We don't need to know what Nazianzen or Nietzsche said. We need to know what the Bible says.

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

You’re equivocating between pagan enchantment and biblical providence.

Something tells me that he is never going to stop doing this.

 

[Right Divider]

Indeed, the kingdom of God is eschatological.

Because of the vague way that you talk about things, I'm not even sure what you mean by that.

It will become our new homeland at the end of the age, but for now it exists as a heavenly realm.

You need to learn to rightly divide the Word of truth.

That earthly kingdom is the kingdom of Israel. There will be other kingdoms of the gentiles that will come to Israel to pay respects and learn from Israel and be blessed by Israel. The body of Christ it neither of those things.