On Good Friday we remember the story of Jesus’ death. We participate in that death through eucharist and in faith. And we celebrate the good news of that death in thinking and pondering the immense love of God for us — to clear our debt, to shoulder our load, and to remove our sins.
Perhaps three prepositions of atonement will be of some use to you today:
He died with us. At the heart of the death of Jesus is that he has completely identified with us. One of the earliest Christian hymns, Philippians 2:6-11, said it like this:
6 Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
Notice that his death is part of his utter identification with us even to the death. He enters into our death.
He died instead of us. But death is the punishment of God for sin, and we read about this from Genesis 3 on in the Bible’s Story. The immensity of the good news of the cross is that he shouldered our load and took upon himself our debt, the punishments of our sin, and did so in our place. He took upon himself the justifiable punishment of sin that we have incurred in dying instead of us. Romans 5:16: “The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation.” Romans 6:10: “The death he died, he died to sin once for all” and 6:23: “The wages of sin is death.” And Jesus became that sin instead of us. 2 Cor 5:21: “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.”
He died for us. That is, his death (and resurrection) set us free. The benefits of his death with us and instead of us is salvation, but I want to focus today on liberation. At Passover the theme was liberation from Egypt and the hope of liberation from Rome. That liberation is not just a political liberation but a liberation from sin that led to captivity. So, when Jesus says in Mark 10:45 that he came to serve and to give his life a “ransom” for many, he is saying he has entered into enemy territory by dying in our place in order to be the ransom price so that we might be set free from slavery – in its full compass.
Thanks Scot, This is a great reflection for the day.
I know what you say is true … yet a part of me feels sad that humanity is so flawed that we needed him to sacrifice himself. I stand in awe of our Lord.
Amen! Thanks. I posted that to my Facebook. Was thinking about rereading One Life over the weekend, but maybe I’ll reread probably again, Community Called Atonement.
Amen. This is our God. High and mighty yet condescending to become one with us to “shoulder our sin”, become our sin-bearer and demonstrate his love. How rich, how measureless is the love of God!
So clear and precise. Thanks for these good words on Good Friday. Like Ted (#3) I posted it to my FB page. God bless you and Kris and your family. We are grateful for your presence in our lives.
John & Julie
Grateful for your shepherding – much needed
What John & Ted said. Blessings on you, Scot.
Scott,
“He died instead of us…death is the punishment of God for sin…”
Are you suggesting that Jesus satisfied the wrath of God in this paragraph – in the penal substitutionary sense?
I am fairly new to this blog and to your writings, and I suppose that I was a bit surprised to read that.
Peace,
Ryan
Ryan,
Wrath and satisfaction theory are not quite the same, so let me explain:
Rom 3:26 says God was both just (he did what was right after all the centuries of patience; he did it in accordance with the divine standards of justice) and the justifier (he made people right with God) on the cross, through the blood. Satisfaction theory relates to justice and to honor.
Wrath is more connected to propitiation (appeasing the wrath of God, pacifying the wrath of God, taught at 1 John 2:2 where Jesus is our advocate with the Father through his sacrifice), and penal substitution theory is connected to Jesus shouldering the punishment due us, and — this is often missed — the fundamental punishment for sin is death. So he died our death, he died instead of our dying, and that means he shouldered the punishment instead of us.
So, yes, with these things clear, I affirm both satsifaction theory (not necessarily in all its Anselmian details, but satisfaction is not only Medieval) and penal substitution theory as parts of the large encompassing atoning work of God in Christ on our behalf.
Scot #9-
Is that wrath/satisfaction difference discussed in your book, A Community Called Atonement?
I would think that assumption was in place; it’s not new.
(Just trying to remind people of the book) ;^)
Scot, with death being God’s punishment for sin and Christ receiving that punishment in our place, why must we still die physically?
I’ve always thought of Christ’s physical death paying the price for my sins, but the death we talk about in Romans 6:23 is spiritual death right?
Does this mean that Jesus’ physical death saves us from the spiritual death? Or did Christ die spiritually as well?
He died as the full identification with us and our sin (he who knew no sin was made sin for us), so his death is not his but our death. But he enters death in order to save us from “that” death — which means not physical death but spiritual death — by coming out the other side of death alive and anew with a new body ready for a glorious existence. We are called to die with Christ (Rom 6) in order to enter into his dying for us so that we can join him in going through death to life beyond death.
Thanks for the clarification. I don’t believe I’ve heard that articulated that way before.
Scott,
But you reject the wrath/propitiation view?
I have never been able to get my mind around the understanding that somehow God was full of wrath against humanity, because of our sin that He needed to pour out HIs wrath on Jesus and put Jesus to death in order to be in relationship with us. It raises all sorts of problems for me.
Thanks for your thoughts.
Ryan
Ryan,
Nope, I don’t reject it: in my book I contend that this too is one way of of the atonement metaphors/images/mechanisms. Where I differ from some is in seeing this as the only way of seeing atonement, and even with those who see it as the central image.
Scott,
I have heard good things about your book and would like to read it. Thanks.
I read in Mark Baker’s book, “Proclaiming the Scandal of the Cross” that the greek word for “propitiation” could also be understood/translated as “expiation” which changes the meaning dramatically. What are your thoughts on this?
Ryan
Ryan,
There probably isn’t one english word that captures the full meaning of the greek word (one of the frustrating things about translation). What scholars need to do is determine the meaning from the immediate context. The context of Romans is that God’s wrath is revealed against sin. Doesn’t it make sense, then, that Christ’s death deals with God’s wrath. I read Green and Baker’s book and at times, although I appreciated many other things they said, it seemed like they were trying really really hard to deny penal substitution. Scot’s book is incredibly helpful. Another good book is Knowing God by J.I. Packer or The Cross of Christ by John Stott. Also helpful is N.T. Wright’s Jesus and the Victory of God where he argues that Jesus’, as the representative of Israel, goes into exile (punishment for sin) so that his people can enter into his kingdom.
OK, ordered the book. Thanks Scot.
(^ that’s a bribe to answer my questions when I have them
)
Thank you for this reminder and post today. A wonderful Good Friday post.
Scot, Blessings to you and Kris on this Good Friday, thanks for the reflection on why it is so GOOD.
Nick #19,
Thanks for the thoughts. I, too, see God’s wrath as a wrath against sin (and not against the individual that needed to be poured out on Jesus before God would relate to us), so I certainly resonate with the notion that this is what the cross deals with.
The penal view (propitiation), as I understand it, still raises many questions in my mind at the least, and at the worst causes me to cringe inside and be leery of God. It seems contradictory to the story of God, as I read it, in so many ways. Then again, maybe it’s because I have baggage.
I will certainly check out some of those books you mentioned. I am a big fan of NT Wright and his worldview.
Thanks, again.
Ryan
Ryan,
If one expresses it correctly I don’t see how one can deny PS. It is clear, in the scriptures, that God punishes. He punishes Adam and Eve by pronouncing curses on them and sending them out of the garden, he punishes disobedient nations for persecuting his people, and he punishes his own disobedient people, Israel, for covenant infidelity by sending them into exile. God punishes those who break shalom. As Plantinga says it, “Sin is culpable Shalom breaking.” We are culpable. And God punishes. That’s why there is death in the first place, no? Jesus himself identifies with Adam and identifies with Israel by going into exile himself. The nations rage against Jesus. The idea is that Jesus is reconstituting his people, redeeming them from their sin, and in order to do that he takes the judgment of God upon himself. He drinks the cup. He is forsaken. He goes into exile on behalf of his sinful people so that they can enter into his kingdom. This is why Isaiah 53 was so important to Jesus. It was the will of God to crush him. This is why Jesus identifies himself as one who comes to serve. This is why Paul, John and the writer of Hebrews can describe Jesus’ death as providing propitiation. It’s not the idea that God is angry and needs to vent his anger. The idea that God is just and must deal with sin.
“For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life…Those who believe in him are not condemned; but those who do not believe are condemned already, because they have not believed in the name of the only Son of God.”
Ryan,
I just read over my last response and I apologize if I came across as prideful at all.
Nick,
Happy Resurrection Day!
Thanks for your reply and thoughts. (No worries about “sounding prideful” – you sounded fine to me.)
Here are some issues that I have with the propitiation view of the atonement:
1. In the PS view, it really seems like God is unwilling to actually forgive us. If God gets what God demands (a payment), albeit it from another source (Jesus), then how does true forgiveness ever take place?
2. When I read of our rebellion against God (in the garden, and every day since), it seems to me that we have surrendered our authority, ourselves, etc. over to the evil one. Inasmuch, we owe a debt to the evil one (not God) – Satan is the one who demands a payment, not God. C.S. Lewis lays this out well in “Lion, Witch and the Wardrobe”. Therefore, the cross is (on one level) about rescuing us from the curse of the evil one (that we put ourselves under). This understanding has many references in the N.T., and was the primary view of the early church.
3. The incarnation speaks of a God who is willing to stoop into our sin, our mess and muck BEFORE any scales of justice are balanced. In Jesus, God doesn’t wait to commune with us until we are made perfect, until some wrath has been satisfied – God dives right in. Love motivates the cross, not wrath.
4. I can’t wrap my mind around the notion that Jesus somehow saves us from God. This schizophrenic, sin-centric view of the atonement doesn’t seem to fit with the story of God as I read it.
As far as your thoughts on punishment – I do think you are on to something. But I have often thought of sin=death in maybe a different way. When we break Shalom, there are also natural/organic consequences. It isn’t necessarily that our sin unbalanced the ledger of God (that needed to be re-balbanced), but that it somehow allowed the evil one access to us that was not there before, and also that it opened us up to a cancerous death that we were once protected from. The whole creation began to suffer this death, not just humans. To me, the story of God is not centered around God dealing with sin by balancing the scales of justice, but restoring the shalom that you mention, about recreation, about overcoming the evil one, about forgiveness.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I’d love to hear more if you have them.
Peace,
Ryan
Scot,
Genesis 2:17 (NIV) says: “for when you eat from it you will certainly die”.
I wonder where the punishment is? “You will die” does not equal “I will kill you”.
Let’s say I tell my buddy “If you drink two bottles of vodka and after that, you drive on the freeway, you will certainly die” – does it mean I am killing him? Or do I merely warn him about the consequences his action would entail by its very nature?
I would go for the second option, and the same goes for Genesis 2:17. Death is not a punishment imposed by God, but death is the consequence of turning away from God. For God is life, and separation from him is death.
Alex,
I would be interested to know if you believe that God ever punishes anyone. What about Israel in exile?, What about judgment on the nations, what about the wrath that Israel and David underwent (Psalm 88, 89)? Can all of these be reduced to the natural consequence of turning away from God?
If I’m reading the prophets correctly then it is God himself who “whistles” for the nations to come and overtake God’s people. Exile, death, and slavery are punishments for Israel’s covenant unfaithfulness. Part of what salvation meant for ancient Israel is to be restored to right covenant relations to God after undergoing God’s punishment for sin. That is what makes Isaiah 53 so glorious. Jesus is Israel’s representative who undergoes the just punishment for sin on Israel’s behalf so that they can be restored and experience God’s new creation. Although what you say has some truth to it there is too much in the biblical storyline to deny the truth that God actively punishes iniquity.