Scripture: 1st Corinthians 15:3-4
For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures…
Thought for the Day: In a nutshell, there’s the Gospel. And the language is pretty well known among even those who would describe themselves as marginally Christian. But knowing the language and understanding the language within its context are two very different things. Let me suggest that the way most people think of Jesus dying for our sins is an 11th century theory created by a guy named Anselm who was trying to make sense of it within the feudal system of his historical setting. The church took it and ran with it and continues, in many settings, to proclaim it. But what has become known as the penal substitutionary atonement theory is so riddled with problems that it is hard to know where to begin so as to reclaim the teaching of scripture. The folks inside the church today have been so taken by this medieval theory that they cannot see and understand atonement within its 1st century context. It was co-opted in such a way that God was made into an ugly vengeful deity that required the sacrifice of Jesus to make forgiveness possible. For the most part, that is not Biblical. When Paul and others spoke of atonement, many scholars believe they were using the language associated with the temple to undermine the power structure of the temple. The religious powers continued to manipulate people, basically saying there were certain sins that could only be taken care of at the temple. It was a cash-cow for those in power. But Paul subverted their monopoly by claiming Jesus as the atoning sacrifice – that Jesus demonstrates that you and I have access to God and divine forgiveness outside the temple system. This Pauline claim was never intended as some sort of divinely ordained system, but as a jab at the religious power brokers. Paul’s idea remains a strong statement to any group, denomination or religious authority that claims the ability to uniquely dispense forgiveness. Next time someone says to you, “Jesus died for your sins,” you can say, “That’s right, Jesus shows the capacity of God to demonstrate love, extend forgiveness, welcome the marginalized, and to do so outside of any religious body that arrogantly believes itself to control what belongs to God.” Any questions? I would expect a few… 🙂
Prayer: Lord, just because lots of people have said it for lots of years, doesn’t necessarily make it true or right or even helpful. Let me first trust your unmerited love that frees me to ask and explore and to rediscover you. Amen.
7 thoughts on “Ecclesiological Etchings: 03-19-13”
Bruce! No questions, just statement…if you are saying, Jesus did not died for the remission of sin, you need to seek The Teacher Holy Spirit and not your man authored books! God is not an ugly vengeful God, but He showed us from the beginning there had to be blood sacrifice. No 11th century scholar thought that up.
Spot on the money, Pastor Bruce! Amen!
I had a feeling this would ruffle a few feathers, but it is my opinion that people have unknowingly put on the glasses of a medieval theologian so tightly that those unrecognizable lenses have skewed how they see and read the scripture. We are all guilty of reading into it what we believe is there, but there are times when we need to step back and ask tough questions…tough questions inspired by the spirit and spirit-filled scholars.
Even the way many people view the Jewish sacrificial system is often incorrect, and then they impose that incorrect view on scripture. The Jewish people did not see the sacrifice of an animal as something God needed, but a ritual that human beings needed (objective vs. subjective atonement). The idea was that when someone offended another person, the offender brought a gift to the offended. The animal was the gift a person brought to God, and the rising smoke from the offering was a symbol that God was receiving the gift. When you give a gift and the person receives the gift, it communicates that the offender has been forgiven. Those who offered the sacrifice took the good parts of the animal and shared in a feast with God, a feast of joyful reconciliation. Of course, the prophets got frustrated with those who started viewing the sacrifice as the easy way of getting God’s forgiveness, yet these people sought no real change. Hosea writes, “For I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings.” Hosea helps us understand, God does not need a sacrifice…God has no desire for burnt offerings. God wants love and a relationship, and we find it in the atoning sacrifice (mercy seat) or meeting place which is Jesus.
The word ‘atonement’ is the word for the mercy seat on the top of the Ark of the Covenant. It was understood as the “meeting place” between God and humanity. Jesus becomes the new meeting place between God and humanity, and the communion table becomes that meal that celebrates the joyful reconciliation. I find (and I would suggest that it is through the spirit’s guidance) five different views/understandings of the cross. As the different preachers (Gospel writers, Paul, etc.) attempted to understand the death and resurrection of Jesus within the unique settings of their congregations, they always started where the people were. Some of the early Christians were Gentiles who went to the idol temples weekly in the belief that they had to beg forgiveness from an unstable god, and it had to be done again and again and again. The author of Hebrews is responding to that thinking and suggesting that God’s forgiveness is eternal. As I read it, the author believed the people should stop spending all their energy seeking forgiveness and start living the life of faith that comes in light of knowing that we are forgiven.
Luke’s Gospel views the cross differently. Jesus was the embodiment of how one lived the Kingdom life, and the Roman execution of Jesus was the world’s opinion on that subject. The resurrection is God’s response to the world’s opinion on the matter. Ultimately, God’s opinion wins. Paul offers us a third option, and Mark and John’s Gospel have their own unique take on the cross. I can faithfully say, Jesus died for our sins, but if I’m honest to scripture, I cannot personally support the theory of a penal substitutionary atonement. It would have been outside the thinking of Jesus, Paul and the other New Testament writers. But what I do find is a Jesus whose commitment to God and humanity was so powerful that he lived the radical love of God all the way to the cross. In that “way” (early Christians were people of the way), Jesus showed us the power of redemptive love to transform the sins of the world. God didn’t need the the cross to forgive humanity, but humanity needed a definitive act by which it could understand, accept and live out the eternal forgiveness of God.
Sorry, my response wasn’t too short. 🙂
Well said. Please could we have a few sermons with this kind of information, or a class on a commentary (may I suggest Willie Barclay). We can all do with a back to basics now and then. 🙂
Absolutely! This is the kind of in-depth Bible Study we will be exploring in the fall.
It is with great remorse that I find myself in need to apologize. My mouth and strong beliefs get me in trouble too many times. Can’t blame anyone but myself. Bruce, please forgive the abruptness of my comment. I realize my comments were personal and not well thought out. Forgive me for that, please. I will bring a sacrificial goat for my penitence, my pride. I have relinquished myself to your authority and regret having stepped away from that surrendering. I look forward to experiencing your class, which will attempt to educate me in your viewpoint. Formidable task, but I am open to change and learning!
No worries… This faith journey is wonderfully crazy, with many turns and discoveries. I learned a couple new things just today that I’m going to be wrestling with. But at the end of the day, I know that the right answers are not the source of my worthiness before God. It is grace, and I see that grace in the life, teaching, sacrifice and resurrection of Jesus.