Euangelion
This article is part of the new Head to Head debate feature at Patheos. This week, in concert with our Engaging Easter coverage, I’m debating Progressive Christian Channel’s Mark Sandlin of “The God Article”. The question: “Why Did Jesus Die on the Cross?”
Mark Sandlin put up his surrejoinder to my rejoinder where he affirms my point of contention.
Sandlin states:
Bird intends …. to discredit my argument by pointing to its lack of connection to Christian tradition. Ultimately, that seems to be the rationale behind his rebuttal as well: We have to believe in the atonement because it’s part of our faith tradition. (A simple way to recognize the significance of tradition as part of his rational is to look at what he says about hymns in his conclusion).
According to Sandlin, one does not have to share one of the most basic and universal Christian beliefs that “Christ died for our sins,” irrespective of how that is parsed; in fact, this statement should be strenuously denied since its bad mojo or something. But if you cannot affirm this, then in what conceivable sense can one identify as a Christian? I mean, how could you call yourself a Buddhist if you denied the eight-fold path and four noble truths? What would a Buddhist say to that? Sandlin is clearly a progressive, I’m just not sure in what religion, since it has nothing to do with the broadest idea of Christianity as its expressed in the global churches.
To sum up the differences between us, at the mention of the word “atonement,” I suspect that Sandlin’s response is “humbug,” while mine is “hallelujah!”
This Easter, Christians around the world are celebrating that Jesus died for our sins and rose for our justification. This is the faith that is sustaining the families of the martyrs in Kenya and Egypt. The word of the cross and the news of the empty tomb is the substance of redemption and the basis of hope for a hurting world. That is the event behind Easter and why Easter is a story of good news still worth celebrating.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In