Atonement

The Atonement

Definition

•  Process by which reconciled with God throughout death of J on the cross
•  Genesis 3 – A and E --> OS, separates us from God. All of us carry it in us.
•  Thus, humankind and God need to be reconciled. Necessary.

‘Atonement’

• Used since 16^th century to convey significance of J’s death
• ‘At one’ by one of first translators of Bible
• ‘To reconcile’
•  NT uses several models to convey how G reconciled humankind to himself through J’s death;
•  Jesus as the 'Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world’
• military victory
• Payment of a ransom to free a slave
• There is no single doctrine of atonement, nor does Church have single definition of what the death of Jesus actually means
•  Theories, however. Most make us of two technical terms; expiation and propitiation
•   Expiation – removing guilt by paying a penalty
•   Propitiation – turning away wrath by making an offering

• OT – sacrifice common, aim to restore a broken relationship between people and God
•  Leviticius 16:20 – 22 describes process; priest symbolically lays the sins of community upon a goat, then cast out into the wilderness
•   Exodus commands Jews to slaughter and eat lamb on the first feast of Passover to remember their deliverance from Egypt
•  When John the Baptist said of Jesus that he was ‘the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world’ (John) the idea would have been familiar to his listeners
• The Epistle to the Hebrews – most extensive NT treatment of J’s death as a sacrifice;
• Through the perfect sacrifice of Jesus, human sin was taken away ‘once and for all’ (Hebrews)Jesus’ death on the cross was thus a complete expiation, a final atonement for sin

• Early Christian theologians took up the image:
• Humans have nothing of sufficient value to sacrifice to God for their sins; God himself had provided the sacrifice for them as he did in the story of Abraham and Isaac (Genesis)
• Augustine wrote in The City of God (about 420 CE):
• '[Jesus] offered sacrifice for our sins. And where did he find that offering, the pure victim that he would offer? Himself.'
• Many have objected to this model on the grounds that no loving God would offer his only Son as a sacrifice to satisfy his own sense of justice
• If so, Christian God = angry tyrant who must be appeased before he forgives

Ransom -

• Variant of the Sacrificial kmodel of atonement
• Gospels indicate Jesus thought of his death in terms of a ransom payment to redeem men and women from sin
• Matthew quotes him as saying that 'the Son of Man came... to give his life in a ransom for many'
• Idea is repeated elsewhere in NT; in Timothy, Paul speaks of 'Jesus... who gave himself a ransom for all'
• Not clear, however, to whom ransom was paid
• Origen, 2nd-century theologian, maintained J's death was a rnsom payment to Satan, to free humankind whom Satan had enslaved following A and E's sin
• As Satan was unaware J was God, he was deceived
• Then suffered a final defeat when J was res
• Many have objected to this model - gives Satan more power than he has and it makes God both a debtor and a deceiver

1931, Swedish theologian Gustaf Aulen repopularised Ransom model in Christus Victor:

• Argued humans had indeed been bound by the hostile powers of death and the devil
• However, the model is nt a theological hypothesis but a passion story about God conquering these powers and thus liberating his people from the b o n d a g e of sin and death
• 'the work of Christ is first and foremost a victory over the powers that hold mankind in b o n d a g e: sin, death, and the devil'
• Thus, whereas Anselm saw the atonement as the payment of a debt of honour to God, Aulen sees it in terms of human beings being liberated from the slavery of sin, of Jesus by his incarnation entering human misery and redeeming it

• Christus Victor model has been criticised on the grounds that it plays down human sin and guilt and is comfortably triumphalist
• However, similar to Irenaeus' Recapitulation model;
• Modified the Ransom model of atonement, arguing God was no debtor to Satan but humans were debtors to God (having fallen prety to Satan in the Fall)
• Debt was cancelled when Jesus 'waged war' against the devil, 'and crushed him who had at the beginning led us captives in Adam'.
• Jesus 'became what we are that we could become what he is'
• Favoured view of the Eastern Orthodox Church

• Satisfaction defined here as : 'reparation', 'recompense', 'propitiation'
• Anselm (Archbishop of Canterbury 1093 - 1109) proposed the Satisfaction model of the atonement, a modification of the Ransom model
• Anselm maintained human sin had so offended God's honour that he could only be satisfied by the death of the God-man, Jesus
• Believed that debt to God was greater than humans were able to pay, so had to pay the debt himself
• But would not redeem unless made by a human, so God became a human being in Jesus so that he could pay the debt to himself
• Jesus was under no obligation to die - his death brought infinite honour to God and gained him a 'superabundance' or 'supererogation' of merit
• Reward (reconciliation with God) was passed onto those who believed in him
• Criticised because based on the concept of honour:
• Concept central in the feudal system of his day; serfs were bound to an overlord who was bound to the king - serfs owed debt of honor for protection as did overlord (God, overlord of the world)
• Depending too much on an unbiblical model

• Protestant reformers considered Anselm's Satisfaction model inadequate - based on concept of God's honour rather than on his justice
• They proposed an alternative Penal Substitution model:
• That Jesus set humans free from being punished for sins by taking that punishment on himself on the cross; thus satisfying the justice of God
• Based their argument on the Suffering Servant Songs in OT Book of Isaiah:
• Famous descriptions of vicarious suffering;
• 'the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all' (isaiah)
• And some pages in Paul's Epistles; 'Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us' (Galatians)
• The Penal Substitution model criticised:
• Based more on a criminal justice system, more so than biblical revelation
• No criminal justice system would justify punishing the innocent instead of the guilty
• Model rooted in violence - portrays God as a God of vengeance who insists own son suffers
• Separtes the Father and the Son - as if the Son saves us from the Father
• Incompatible with proper Christian understanding of the nature of God

Others have argued that the Penal Substitution model is the mechanism by which everything else achieved by Jesus on the cross:

• The cross as ransom: the image works only if Jesus took our punishment.
• The cross as example: this demands that we identify Jesus with self-sacrifice, but we can only identify him because he first identified with us in our sin by taking our punishment
• The cross as victory: we can share Jesus' victory only if we are united with him. Cannot be united with him unless our sins are forgiven. Our sins are forgiven because Jesus has taken our punishment for us, as our substitute.

Another model of the atonement, first formulated by Augustine and restated by Peter Abelard in reaction against Anselm's Satisfaction theory, is the Moral Example model. Much favoured by modern liberal theologians:

• Proposes Jesus died, not to appease or placate God, but to show humans the depth of God's love for them
• The purpose wwas to lead people to repentance
• Thus, the atonement is not aimed at the appeasement of God's honour or justice, but at the moral improvement of humankind

Criticised:

• Does not explain the crucifixion. Jesus did not need to die in order to provide people with a perfect moral example. He could hhave done so by his life and teachings.
• It teaches that humans can achieve salvation through their own moral effort
• It thus teaches that humans can achieve salvation through works, not through faith, and denies the supernatural effect of the death of Jesus
• It belittles God's anger against sin

Extent to which the three images of the atonement are contradictory

• Totally diff means of salvation - some called this a contradictory and incoherent collection
• Moral Example model - salvation can be achieved through personal moral effort
• Claimed that the theory was taught in the 3rd century CE, whereas the Penal Substitution theory did not appear until the 16th century, and so they argue that this is the original basis for any atonement model
• Whilst they do not see any inconsistency, there is a sense of priority in understanding
• Maintain supported by NT teaching on the necessity of repentance for salvation and that this is the very foundation of Christian faith

Extent to which the three images of the atonement are contradictory

• Sacrificial and Penal Substitution - salvation can be achieved only through the death of Christ and our faith in him
• Maintain supported by NT teaching on the necessity of faith for salvation and, although the PS theory was not systematically proposed until the 16th century, its origins are found in the NT itself
• Indeed, Sacrificial model is much earlier and has origins in the OT
• However, in The Cross of Christ, the evangelical theologian John Stott proposed Moral Example model can be seen as part of the Penal Substitution model
• Whereas the PS theory focuses entirely on death of Jesus, the ME theory sees Jesus' death in the wider context of his ethical teaching
• Jesus was sentenced to die because of what he taught
• Thus, ME and PS are interconnected within the larger story of Jesus' incarnation, crucifixion and resurrection

Extent to which the three images of the atonement are contradictory

• Claimed ME model clashes with Paul's rejection of salvation through works
• Some would see this understanding as dangerous and firmly rejected in the NT writings
• However, may be resolved if accept that Paul lwas referring to Jewish ritual 'works' (e.g. circumcision, dietary rules) and not to good works in general
• Salvation through works (personal morality, faithfulness to Jesus' teaching) can thus be harmonised with salvation through faith in what Jesus achieved through his sacrificial death
• In addition, the NT itself suggests that, in the words of James, 'you foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless?'
• And 'show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds'
• ^ which suggests that the tension between salvation by faith and salvation through personal moral effort are not separate theories

Extent to which the three images of the atonement are contradictory

• The three images are not contradictory, nor are they mutually exclusive;
• They all help to bring out different aspects of the atonement
• One possible conclusion -
• Although there may be debate about which is the most important understanding of the atonement, each understanding serves to support the other rather than contradict it
• It could be considered unfair to accept a conclusion that they are contradictory in the light of this
• Unless of course one takes a very dogmatic and narrow stance that to embrace another understanding would impair theological thinking and cause confusion, uncertainty, and heresy.
• Perhaps doubtful that the latter view could be justified or supported by many

Extent to which the three images suggest that the Christian God is cruel

• Some argued that all 3 could be interpreted as suggesting this
• Sacrificial model - portrays J's death in terms of the OT scapegoat or passover lamb
• Follows that a God who offers his own Son as a sacrifice in order to satisfy his own sense of justice is an angry tyrant who must be appeased before he forgives
• The variant Ransom model makes God both a deceiver and a debtor
• As regards the Satisfaction model, based on medieval concepts, it depicts God as a feudal overlord who is more concerned with his own hurt pride than with the hurt experienced by his Son
• The reformers' Penal Substitution theory simply replaced Anselm's concept of God's offended honour with the concept of God's offended justice
• It portrays God as a vengeful God who perpetrates 'a form of cosmic child abuse' against his Son
• God appears therefore to be a God of retribution, inconsistent with presentations as a God of love, mercy and forgiveness

Extent to which the three images suggest that the Christian God is cruel

• In addition, neither doe the Moral Example model explain the passion and crucifixion:
• For example, if all J did was to provide people with a perfect moral example, why did he have to die? What doe this tell us about God?
• All srs accusations against an omnibenevolent God!
• However, others would argue that none necessarily show a cruel God...

• The very word 'atonement' expresses that there was a need for a sinful humanity to be reconciled with God
• In line with this reasoning, J's death was God's way of achieving this reconciliation
• Was part of his eternal plan to save humanity
• Moreover, was not the end, bc three days later Jesus was resurrected
• Clearly shows God's love for both humanity and his Son
• In a sense, despite apparent inconsistencies raised in analysis parts of the story, the full and complete picture and understanding emerge at the end - the end justifies the means.

Extent to which the three images suggest that the Christian God is cruel

• In addition, the Sacrificial/and Ransom models emphasise that J willingly died for his enemies
• Augustine writes, 'where did he find that offering, the pure victim that he would offer? He offered himself'
• In this context, we need to remember that as Jesus himself is God, the sacrifice for humanity causes suffering to God himself
• the Satisfaction/ Penal Substitution model emphasises that Jesus died the death that that sinners deserved
• This must be the ultimate example of divine love
• The Moral Example model in particular emphasises that J accepted an undeserved death
• This was a demonstration of love that moves Christians to repent and thus reconciles them with God

• In conclusion, one possible solution could be that despite serious accusations of cruelty charged against the Christian God, these can only be upheld when focusing on parts of the picture
• The best defence of the Christian God is to see the picture in its entirety and the end result

'And the goat shall be set free in the wilderness' (Leviticus)

'The payment could not be made to God, because God was not holding sinners in captivity for a ransom, so the payment had to be to the devil' (Origen)

'Through a tree we were made debtors to God; so through a tree we have our debt cancelled' (Irenaeus)

'Getting so angry with the world and the people he created and then, to calm himself down, demanding the blood of his own son? ... And anyway, why should God forgive us through punishing somebody else? It was worse than illogical, it was insane. It made God sound like a psychpath. If any human being behaved like this, we would say rthey were a monster' (Jeffrey John)

'Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us' (Galatians)

'Our redemption through the suffering of Christ... secures for us the true liberty of the children of God, in order that we might do all things out of love rather than out of fear - love for him that has shown us such grace' (Abelard)

• Sacrifice, Penal Sub, Moral Example
• Also variant models
• Sacrifice model has a variant Ransom model, which was further developed in 1931 by Aulen into the Christus Victor model
• The Penal Sub model is a development of an earlier Satisfaction model
• Early theo saw J's death as sacrifice for human sin:
• based on OT ideas of sacrifice (Abraham and Isaac in Genesis; scapegoat in Leviticus) and on the Jewish Passover lamb, they argued humans had nothing for God, but G had provided the 'pure victim'  for them in Jesus
• Based on indications in the Gospels that J himself thought of his death in terms of a ransom payment to redeem human beings from sin, Origen developed the Sacrificial model into a Ransom model, maintaining that Jesus' death was a ransom payment to Satan (quote!!)
• Anselm, Archbishop of Banterbury, developed the Ransom model into the Satisfaction model
• Arguing that because people's debt to God was greater than they could pay, G had to do it
• Had to be made by a human - God became human in Jesus so could satisfy his offended honour
• Protestant reformers changed the basis of Anselm's Satisfaction model from the concept of God's honour to that of God's justice

• Ransom model modified further by Aulen, who saw J's death as a 'victory over the powers which hold mankind in b o n dage: sin, death, and the devil'
• To him, atonement is not the payment of a debt of honour to God or a vicarious punishment, but a victory by which Jesus triumphs over the powers of evil
• Finally, ME model!
• mostly associated with Abelard. This model proposes that Jesus died to show human beings the depth of God's love for them and lead them to repentance

• Many have objected to the Sacrificial model - no loving God would offer only Son
• Makes Satan more powerful, makes God debtor and deceiver
• Anselm's Satisfaction model - unbiblical, medieval concept of 'honour' - God as feudal overlord
• The Penal Sub model is criticised - criminal justice system
• Punish innocent? Thus, portrays God as unreasonable, vengeful God.
• Separating the F and the S
• S steps in to save people from the F - According to Jeffrey John, 'it made God sound like a psychopath'

• Aulen's Christus Victor model - plays down human sin and is triumphalist
• Despite being favoured by liberal theologians, many find the ME model flawed - does not explain why Jesus had to die
• Leans too much in the direction of salvation through works, and belittles God's anger against sin

• The Christian Church has no agreed doctrine of the atonement
• Despite their shortcomings, all 3 main models, and their variants, are attempts by finite human minds to interpret the mind of God

Whether the ME theory is a convincing model of the atonement

• Removes the risk of portraying God in a negative light, as most other theories do;
• The early theories that J died as a sacrifice for human sin (Hebrews), or that his death was a ransom payment to Satan (Origen) present God either as a tyrant or as a debtor and deceiver, and the 16-century reformers' Penal Sub portrays him as an unjust child abuser
• Gives humans responsibility for following Jesus' moral example
• With other models, humans have no part in the process of salvation. All the work is done by Jesus.
• Does not allege that Jesus' death had any 'supernatural' effect
• Makes atonement more acceptable to those who call for the demythologisation of the supernatural aspects of the Gospel message
• On further examination, however, the ME is not co convincing
• Does not explain why J had to die... could have given his followers necessry moral example in his life and teaching
• Teaches salvation through works, not faith
• Humans can now secure their own salvation through own moral effort by following J's example - goes against idea of justification thorugh faith, one of the cardinal beliefs of the Protestant Reformation

• Diminishes God's anger against sin
• If Jesus' death was not in some way a vicarious death for the punishment of human sin, then the Fall has not been erased and God's justice has still not been administered and satisfied